On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > Hi Reinhard, > > Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-11-27 18:35:05) >> In order to address this, I've proposed to replace lena.pnm with a new >> image, taken by me, at https://github.com/libav/libav/pull/17 > > Fun idea :-) > > >> I don't really care about the licensing. Is the declaration in the >> commit message OK? How to declare that in debian/copyright? > > I might get away with such custom set of licensing terms, but to ease > processing (if not by lawyers in a later dispute then at least by fellow > distro maintainers wanting to categorize, identify, verify etc.) it is > recommended that you instead pick a common license. Preferrably one of > those tracked by SPDX as listed at > <https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-specification>. > > Seems what you want is as liberal and as briefly expressed license as > possible. A popular common license of that kind is "Expat". ideally > you refer to that license by its canonical URL > <http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt> but since you seem to seek as > brief as possible expression, you could simply state e.g. "Licensed > under the Expat license." > > I am not a lawyer, just interested in licensing and pay attention to > licensing patterns commonly expressed by upstreams of Debian and > approved in Debian. YMMV.
Sure, if you believe that the expat license is appropriate, I'd license it that way. Thanks for the feedback. Reinhard _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
