"oohay moc." <loopy_b...@yahoo.com> writes: > So! I was wondering what the community at large, and hopefully the > main Debian developers, think about InaTux's "Author's Choice of > Terminology License"? You can find it here: > http://www.inatux.com/actl/
It's much more practical to look at how *works* are licensed, since often the details of the license are best considered in light of the specific work. What specific existing works is this license currently applied to? What specific works is it proposed for application to? > It has been discontinued, but, I am wondering if the community and the > Debian developers would think about licensing the Debian operating > system under such a license? There is no single license for the Debian operating system. It is distributed under the combined terms of all its thousands of component parts. The copyright license terms for each part should be documented in ‘/usr/share/doc/$PACKAGENAME/copyright’. If you want to discuss further in the context of specific works, I suggest you take it to the ‘debian-legal’ list (Cc set). If you *don't* want to discuss in the context of specific works, I'm not understanding what the point is. > I know it conflicts with the GNU GPL, but putting that aside. It only conflicts with the GNU GPL if one attempts to apply its terms simultaneously with the GPL to the same work. > I have sent an email to Richard Stallman asking a similar question, no > response. What is it you are hoping to get from such a conversation, either with Richard Stallman or with the Debian project? I'm having difficulty seeing what the subject is. -- \ “I must say that I find television very educational. The minute | `\ somebody turns it on, I go to the library and read a book.” | _o__) —Groucho Marx | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
