On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 04:40:43PM -0500, Joe Smith wrote: > > "John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>> 3. If they charge a fee for the CD-ROM or other media on which >>> they deliver the Mugshot™ code, they warranty the media on >>> which the Mugshot™ code is delivered, thus ensuring that the >>> recipient receives a usable copy. >> >> Paragraph 3 may be the first problem. It basically prevents "cheap CD" >> vendors from selling copies of Debian on an "as is" basis. > > I'm not sure this is a real concern. are they really selling the > media as-is? So If the cd comes scratched so bad it does not work, > or is warped, the buyer has no recourse? > > I can see no warrenty on data being useable for anything, but I'm > not aware of anybody who sells Disc's who does not have at least a > limited warrenty covering manufactiong defects on the media. (As > opposed to data defects)
I agree this is probably more of a theoretical concern than an actual problem. Anyone who refused to replaced defective CDs would go out of business very quickly! > Including that notice in the package long description would > certainly cover the packages.debian.org and downloading via > aptitude/synaptic. But I don't think out ftp architecture is set up > such as to allow us to include a README file in the same directory. > > My guess is that including the statement in the package's long > description is would be considered by RedHat as sufficient, but we > should really get clarification. I'd be amazed if this approach was a problem, but I agree a clarification is worthwhile. Presumably the notice could also be included in the "copyright" file? > The distribution media thing is likely something the ftpmasters > would need to decide. It not really so much a freeness problem, as > potential practical problem should an organization unwilling to > place a limited warrenty on the physical media exist and desire to > destribute Debian. > > The notice requirement can be solved, if Red Hat agrees that > including the notice in the package's long description is > sufficient. (Which I expect they will, but we really need offical > clarification on.) I agree. So overall it sounds like this will be OK, subject to that point about the distribution media and the clarification from Red Hat. John (TINLA) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
