On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 05:36:42PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > So you're right that the rule is that the GPL must be shipped when you
> > ship the complete work, and that it's not quite sensible to mean with
> > every piece of the complete work.
>
> Note that we ship the base-files package marked as "Essential: yes",
> and it's shipped accompanying every .deb on every Debian mirror.
This is cutting it close on DFSG 8
8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
program's being part of a Debian system. If the program is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but
otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties
to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights
as those that are granted in conjunction with the Debian system.
So the rights to distribute any GPL software .debs are viable when the
package is extracted from Debian and used within terms of the GPL?
Right now, I'd say no, and it looks as if RMS would agree. The issue I
disagree on is whether including the license text makes it fall within
the DFSG. Because then the licensing criterion will discriminate against
those of us with low drive space, violating DFSG 5, and discriminate
against making a small footprint distribution, violating DFSG 6. The
cat's out of the bag on DFSG 8 ATM, and there's no way it's going back in.
<snip>
--
FINE, I take it back: UNfuck you!
Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
