[Please CC Me as I am not subscribed to this list] It has come to my attention that due to the discussion of a possible problem with the aspell-en licence, Aspell-en 0.50 may not get uploaded to Debian even though the issue was never really resolved.
Thus I will repeat my argument once again. But, this time I would like I response to the points I made and by the end of our debate I would like a definite answer on what should be done, if anything, to resolve the problem. Since SCOWL is a compilation of several word lists, one of them which in DEC which is also a compilation of several word lists. I really do not think there is a problem. Many many of the word lists in SCOWL are taken the words in well known copyrighted dictionaries. So a case could be made that many of the other word lists SCOWL uses are also also of questionable copyright and should be removed which will lead me with nothing. I also have a felling that this is how many of the Ispell/Aspell dictionaries are created for other languages. So you better remove every single Ispell/Aspell dictionary from the Debian distribution because you could be violating some one else's copyright. The point is that if I did not list my sources it will be virtually imposable for some one to prove in court that I violated a copyright of one of the word lists used in the DEC word list. Thus even if I did violate a copyright it will virtually be unenforceable due to the very indirect nature which I used the word lists. Also note that the DEC Word List is used in the linux.words package which the author claims is free of any copyright. This word list has been used any many distributes including Debian's as "text/wenglish". So if you are going to be anneal about Aspell word lists you should also remove this package. Thus I will remove the DEC word list only if 1) Debian will refuse to include the English word list due to questionable copyright on some of the sources that DEC uses and 2) the wenglish package is also removed from future debian distributions since it also contains the same word lost. But If I remove the DEC word list I will make a note on the reason why it is removed which will include a statement by me which more or less states that I think Durban-legal is being completely anneal about the matter. If the DEC word list author was not so careful to list all of his sources this issue would never have come up. --- http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org
