On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 15:32 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 10:43:25AM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:23, Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org> > >wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:14, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > >>> On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:17:33AM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 07:14, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > >>> > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +Files: ./bin/pddp/pddpserver.tcl > >>>>>> +Copyright: 1996-1997, Sun Microsystems > >>>>>> +License: NONE > >>>>>> + FIXME > >>>> > >>>> This looks like a weird BSD, Hans please check it out. > >>> > >>> Where did you see that? > >>> > >>> I found _no_ licensing related to that copyright statement. > >> > >> The referenced CVS address (which is broken because sourceforge has > >> changed its dns scheme) has a license for the project. > > > >For the record: > >http://tclhttpd.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/tclhttpd/tclhttpd/license.terms?revision=1.4&view=markup > > The grandfathered licensing terms include this: > > > The authors hereby grant permission [...], provided that existing > > copyright notices are retained in all copies and that this notice is > > included verbatim in any distributions. > > We therefore need to involve upstream and request them to include above > licensing, as their granted license was violated when the header was > stripped, and they therefore cannot pass on a license to us (or anyone > else) for that file.
All of the code in that library, borrowed or not, is under the same license: the Tcl/Tk license. Is it still necessary to include multiple copies of the Tcl/Tk license as long as we have the copyrights listed in debian/copyright? .hc _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
