Re: Manoj, why are you suggesting to infringe the copyright law?
On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 03:45:03PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Stop lying, Marcus.
I never did. Your words were very clear, and you repeated them multiple
times, there is no room for wrong interpretation.
I too encourage anyone to get the whole picture by reading the relevant
posts on the policy list.
> No one is infringing the copyright law. I
> am just suggesting a reorganiztion of information in debian. No one
> is going to stop shipping the GPL in debian, it just will be in a
> different place on the archive.
As a matter of fact, I think it is already wrong that we don't ship the GPL,
LGPL, BSD and Artistic license with the binary packages. And you were saying
that you don't want immutable license documents in Debian main at all.
> You fail to mention that one way of appeasing my arguments is
> to allow stuff like the FSSTND in main, or atleast in verbatim.
Something which is completely independent from this serious issue.
If we ship FSSTND in main is completely independent from the fact if we ship
the GPL in main.
> I am sorry you can't conduct a technical discussion in a
> decorous and serious fashion. I do not think your tantrums and name
> calling really deserve much more of a response.
What name calling?
> >>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
>
> Marcus> Hello,
>
> Marcus> [this mail is cross posted to debian-devel, as I think it is
> Marcus> important for other developers to know what mischief is going
> Marcus> on here on debian-policy. Follow up please to
> Marcus> debian-policy. The whole thread can be read in debian-policy,
> Marcus> too]
>
> Mischief? The mischief is that you quote me out of context,
> and you present an incomplete argument. Part of my article was merely
> a refutation of what you said; I encourage people to read teh
> archives and not trust Marcus's propoganda.
"Quote out of context"? Here is the header of the message:
To: Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>
Cc: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>, debian-policy@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: What RMS says about standards (was: [rms@gnu.org: Re: Questions
regarding free
+documentation.]
From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>
Date: 16 Aug 1998 11:35:23 -0500
X-UIDL: 5d29454dfe69a162ee9ed8c31ca31ec8
Please look it up. here is the full text:
> Hi,
> >>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
>
> Joey> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> Because I think that it is in the interests of Debian to
> >> distribute even verbatim documents as part of the
> >> distribtution. Remember, we havbe not even covered teh other sets of
> >> verbatim documents (personal opinions, stories, amgzines, graphic
> >> novels). It is not clear why we should necesarily throw it all out of
> >> our distribution.
>
> Joey> I don't know about you, but I like to be able to point to a debian cd and
> Joey> say, "You can modify any of the stuff on here to your hearts content, with
> Joey> no restricton whatsoever. You can use it however you desire. (Well, er,
> Joey> except those nasty copyright documents themselves.)"
>
> And I say we should not have the exception even for copyright
> documents. They should be in the verbatim section, on another CD, but
> in an required package, and with all indications that they are an
> integral part of Debian.
>
> manoj
End of the message. If you mean the whole thread, well, you have repeated it
multiple times, in several contexts.
> Marcus> This is breaking the copyright law and I disagree strongly.
>
> Rubbish. Already, most binary packages point to
> /usr/doc/copyright/GPL et al; and copyright law says nothing about
> whether you have to have things on the same CD.
Debian does ship source packages and binary packages, too. Everyone can
download a binary package, and will not get the copyright. This is a
misconception.
> Marcus> Most copyright licenses (all I know of) are *not* modificable. Manoj things
> Marcus> that this is not in accordance with the general freeness of
> Marcus> the Debian main distribution, and therefore wants to have the
> Marcus> licenses removed from the main distribution. This ignores the
> Marcus> core difference between copyright documents and other works,
> Marcus> as licenses *apply* to other works and are the only thing
> Marcus> that grants us redistribution. Not shipping the license means
> Marcus> not shipping at all.
>
> Standards apply to other works too.
Standards have nothing to do with this serious issue.
> Anyway, the consensus, minus Marcus, seems to be drifting to
> having a verbatim section. Marcus has lost it; dragging people in
> debian-devel as his aguments seem to be loosing in debian-policy, and
> accusing people of "mischief".
The "verbatim" section was not about the copyrights of the software we ship,
but was about other immutable documents. You choose to extend the discussion
to copyrights as well, and so far I have not heard any voice supporting you
in this opinion.
> I shall leave the debian-devel list alone, and uninvolved in
> this debate after this message. Read the archives of debian-policy if
> you are interested in this issue.
This is a very serious issue. A copyright is not the funny little text you
ignore anyway. It is the only thing that grants our rights.
Thank you,
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: