> > We do not *redistribute* isdn2h323 but we *distribute* it. This > > paragraph is only interesting for programs like isdngw, which are > > modified versions of isdn2h323. > > Debian redistributes it. We're not saying that you are doing anything > illegal. We're saying that Debian hasn't gotten permission from you > to redistribute isdn2h323.
I do not think that this is true. > That is because you've given Debian a > license that it can't comply with. Why? > Specifically, the additional notices are additional restrictions that > you've added to the license. Additional restrictions? We simply clarify how to read GPL's paragraph about copyright notices. > However, the GPL says that you can't add > any more restrictions. Sorry to say that, but this is nonsense. The GPL is only a *text* document and not a person/company. > If you just said that the code is offered under the GPL, then there > would be no problem. If you said that it was under the GPL, but > without clause 6 and with the additional notices, then it might not be > a problem. But you've put Debian into a bind because it can't obey > clause 6 and the additional notices at the same time. I do not think that this correct. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
