Steve M. Robbins writes ("Re: Status of uw-prism packaging for Debian"):
> My guess is that the legality of distribution hinges on how the software is
> represented. For example, [1] defines "device" as:
>
> any article, instrument, apparatus or contrivance, including any
> component, part or accessory thereof, manufactured, sold or represented
> for use in
>
> a. the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation or prevention of a disease,
> disorder or abnormal physical sate, or its symptoms, in human
> beings or animals,
>
> ... etc.
>
> If the software makes no claim about diagnosis or treatment, perhaps it's
> still OK, as in the Osirix case.
This sounds like it could be dealt with by appropriate wording in the
Description and/or documentation (eg manpages)
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/21480.56123.52197.416...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
