Bug#65577: Amended] copyright should include notice if a package is not a part of Debian distribution

[Brian Mays <brian@debian.org>]

> Do you think that "All the packages in the other sections" should be
> also modified to "All the packages in non-free or contrib sections" ?

No.  Not really.

> What I wish to see is more explanation for users. Many ordinary users
> are not specialists in license. In many cases, they may not understand
> the meaning of a license correctly when they are just told "read the
> license by yourself". We can explain what is the problem briefly for
> them, I hope.

As long as we are not attempting to interpret the license for them, I
suppose that this is okay.  Personally, I think that we should limit our
"explanations" to a brief comment about why we think that the license
fails to meet the DFSG (for non-free) or which non-free package the
package causes the package to be consigned to "contrib".

I really don't think that we should be commenting on the license other
than that.  For one thing, if we start commenting on licenses, we're
likely to (unintentionally) upset or offend somebody.  Furthermore,
it is easy to conceive of a maintainer misinterpreting a license and
explaining it incorrectly.  We don't want to be in that position.

- Brian