Le Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:45:02AM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit : > > I think that the lack of a copyright statement is a feature, not a bug. > The only purpose that a copyright notice serves under Berne is to > establish additional statutory damages in some countries like the US (by > meeting the legal requirements for knowing infringement), but for this > (and given that license) we don't really care. And I have no desire to > examine all the history of DEP-5 development to try to come up with an > accurate and complete copyright notice. As we've found with Debian > Policy, they're not really maintainable for these sorts of documents where > wording suggestions come from innumerable different people. > > I would therefore like to just apply the following patch: > > --- a/copyright-format/copyright-format-1.0.xml > +++ b/copyright-format/copyright-format-1.0.xml > @@ -14,8 +14,8 @@ > <legalnotice> > <para> > Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification, > - are permitted in any medium without royalty provided the copyright > - notice and this notice are preserved. > + are permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is > + preserved. > </para> > </legalnotice> > <abstract>
Hi Russ, I totally agree with your analysis and second that change. Cheers, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120227090046.gd25...@falafel.plessy.net
