In that copyright file I see an email (did anyone followup)? At 12:51 PM 3/22/99 -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
>Hello. I have the responsibility of assessing the current copyright >of W3C DTDs accompanying your specifications, on behalf of the Debian >project <URL:http://www.debian.org/>. Interesting question Adam! >I would think that the W3C is >happy to allow derivative DTDs so long as they don't represent >themselves as W3C standards? If so, would it be possible to get >clarification about the licensing and rights granted for DTDs? You are right with respect to our general approach. I suspect that as long as the DOCTYPE is different from our own, and they attribute it as a work derived from W3C, we'd give permission. Let me bounce this off a few folks here, and I'll get you a definitive answer shortly. On Nov 30, 2015 10:01 PM, <stresswa...@ruggedinbox.com> wrote: > > [C]an someone reply with a bad source package (or d/copyright file) > > that we can evaluate in main? > > Here is sgml-data's copyright file: > < > http://ftp-master.metadata.debian.org/changelogs//main/s/sgml-data/sgml-data_2.0.10_copyright > >. > > Here is the source of sgml-data: > < > http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sgml-data/sgml-data_2.0.10.tar.xz > >. > Offending files are in sgml/entities/sgml-iso-entities*/. Also, files > in xml/entities/xml-iso-entities-8879.1986 are derived from files with > the same licence. > > The files and files derived from them are in other packages as well. > > >
