Re: Advise about missing copyright info
(Please follow the Debian mailing list code of conduct. I didn't ask
for personal copies of messages also sent to the list.)
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> * Ben Finney:
> > If not, this does appear to me to be a policy bug. Such a bug must
> > be fixed either by removing the package from Debian or by getting
> > a clear, correct statement of copyright for the work from the
> > copyright holder, and recording that in 'debian/copyright'.
>
> Usually, it's argued on this list
I'm presuming "this list" refers to debian-legal, as opposed to the
other list in this discussion.
> that a requirement for precise
> information on the copyright holder fails the Dissident Test.
I've not seen the Dissident test applied that way.
The Dissident test applies to whether the *recipient* of the work can
exercise their freedoms, including the freedom to modify and/or
redistribute, without being forced to personally identify themselves.
The *copyright holder* can't expect to remain anonymous and still be
identified as the copyright holder. (Copyright laws might nevertheless
assert that an anonymous entity can hold copyright, but that's beside
the point here.)
I don't see that the Dissident test applies to the copyright holder
(as opposed to recipients of the work), nor that it's non-free to
require the copyright holder to be personally identifiable.
> (SCNR)
Hopefully you also see the distinction as I do.
--
\ "Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "I think so, |
`\ Brain, but isn't a cucumber that small called a gherkin?" -- |
_o__) _Pinky and The Brain_ |
Ben Finney
Reply to: