On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 08:30:30PM +0100, Jo Shields wrote: > > > > If there's a problem, we'll get it sorted out, but I need more specific > > info on your findings; the example you pasted shows a file with nor > > copyright statement neither license information (from tomboy) and one > > with both of them (in gnote). Please tell me which of these (in your > > judgement) apply: > > > > - The new file seems to be asserting copyright for the code as > > a whole, and it's not implicitly understood that it only applies > > to the originality added to it by rewriting in C++. > > > > (this is somewhat contentious, since there are examples of other > > programs doing the same, but it can be fixed by adding a clarification > > to each file) > > > > - The new license (GPL v3) is incompatible with LGPL v2.1 > > > > (it's not; see section 13 of the LGPL v2.1) > > > > - There are copyright/license statements being replaced, elsewhere in > > the code. > > > > (if this is so, please give some example) > > > > - Something else. > > > > (be my guest) > > [...] > the copyright header in the > file is clearly asserting that the file is 100% copyrighted by Hubert > Figuiere when it's not. > > [...] > > And so on. "* Copyright (C) 2009 Hubert Figuiere" is simply false,
Alright. So, I understand you mean option 1 (see my paragraph starting with "The new file seems to be asserting..." above). Unless there's a clear consensus in -legal that this is not a problem, I will assume it is. I'm fine with extra clarification, for the sake of correctness, it just means a bit more work. I'll speak with the gnote author about it. > and a > clear violation of Tomboy's license. Notice license and copyright statements are two separate issues. AFAIK LGPL doesn't explicitly require that a license notice is preserved mixing code with other licenses like the BSD license does, but I could be mistaken. Any advice on this from -legal? -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
