Re: debian/copyright file
Robin Cornelius <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> There are a couple of files that do NOT have copyright, these were
> created by a US government contractor and therefor :-
> Copyright: It is the policy of NLM (U.S. National Library of Medicine)
> (and U.S. government) to not assert copyright.
> License: other
> A non-exclusive copy of this code has been contributed to the Open JPEG
> Except for copyright, inclusion of the code within Open JPEG for
> distribution and use
> can be bound by the Open JPEG open-source license and disclaimer,
> expressed elsewhere.
> Is this a problem at all, not having asserted copyright?
License here is actually public domain, although I see the wiki page
doesn't yet allow this, probably because people misuse it who don't
understand what public domain means.
Yes, this is fine. All the license is saying is that because the software
is public domain, the OpenJPEG project can put another license on it
(probably the license of the package as a whole).
Any software (or any other copyrightable work) created directly by the US
government is legally public domain under US law. (Note that this does
*not* apply to all software created by US government contractors. It
depends on the terms of the contract. But if they say that the contract
didn't assign copyright to the contractor in this case, it's reasonable to
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>