INAL, but here's my view:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Dmitry Nezhevenko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to package a "web" application that contains some
> minimized third-party JavaScript code. It's from JQuery world.
>
> Anyway I'm going to package "git" snapshot because latest release needs
>
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:24:50AM -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Dmitry Nezhevenko wrote:
> >
> > Upstream distributes in both "source" and "minimized" forms:
> >
> > http://masonry.desandro.com/jquery.masonry.min.js
> > https://github.com/desandro/masonry/blo
l.
>
>
> (For the record, I am also convinced that CC-by-sa-v3.0 fails to
> meet the DFSG, but that's another story, since FTP masters disagree
> with me, unfortunately).
>
>
> I hope the incompatibility issue may be fixed soon for the Joy theme.
Not such a big deal
Jun 24, 2012 at 07:34:50 -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> >
> > > > The major issue seems to be that the Joy plymouth theme mixes parts
> > > > released under CC-by-sa-v3.0 and parts released under GPLv2+.
> > > > Since CC-by-sa-v3.0 is incompatible w
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Adrien Aubourg
wrote:
> The wiki page now only contain the material used for packaging, with mention
> of the GPLv2 license.
> The old proposals are still reachable, as the archive is still online.
>
> The debianart stuff has been partly reuploaded (only the stuf
contacted via email on e...@dra.hmg.gb or by
> writing to ELLA Office, DRA, St Andrews Road, Malvern, Worcs WR14 3PS, UK.
>
>
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:44:17AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:59:13PM +0100, Sian Mountbatten wrote:
> > Dear List
> >
> > Please find attached a copy of the copyright in all the source files
> > of the algol68toc compiler.
> &g
> As I noted there, such extreme interpretation of license text can yield
> GPL2.0 to violate DFSG #5.
>
> I think after he failed to shootdown OpenOffice for its licence, he
> became quiet. If we followed such tests by him, we would not have
> LibreOffice either now.
>
>
gt; sell this program commercially, reasonable distribution costs
> > excepted.
>
> > Use and or distribution of this software implies acceptance of the
> > above.
> > --paste--
This looks very much non-free and should be moved to non-free
immediately, or removed from t
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:07:38AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:12:40 -0400 Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 07:59:17PM +0700, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
> > > >>>>> Matthaeus Wander writes:
> [...]
> > >
&
th a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive:
> http://lists.debian.org/20130201002521.gn30...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
>
Cheers,
Paul
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Again, why do you plan on removing free software from main due to a
change in license?
Cheers,
Paul
[1]:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GfEnd4xeEJs/UOxBvCCdgGI/BSU/PgL41SlEQ98/s1600/huh-what.gif
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 409
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 09:15:15AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> Again, why do you plan on removing free software from main due to a
> change in license?
As algernon points out, it makes slightly more sense when you remember
that the AGPLv3 is not compatable with the GPLv2
I'm st
iction - if you're using my
Sure, but that doesn't make it DFSG free (hint: it's likely not)[1][2]
[1]: The Dissident test
[2]: The Desert Island test
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A
files at
runtime, too!
I don't think it's not a combined work if it's reading the data file at
runtime.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
said.
I don't see how you can draw a distinction between a data file being
loaded and an image being edited.
Anyway, end-of-thread for me,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B3
assume there *is* doubt. Which there isn't.
I'm seriously out of this thread :)
-T
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
bian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130831143031.ga8...@falafel.plessy.net
>
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Develo
t; be great. It might also be a good idea for someone to scan back for
> bugs tagged json-evil-license, open or closed or archived, and alert the
> relevant maintainers of this change.
Thank you for caring about the freeness of our archive :)
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliam
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:05:22AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 02:45:59PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> > The lintian tag license-problem-json-evil, added per BTS 692616, should
> > have its description modified ... because those files have been
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:18:58AM -0400, Miles Lubin wrote:
> Dear debian-legalers,
Yo, Miles!
> - The debian directory had no explicit license mentioned in the
> copyright file. It was pointed out by Paul Tagliamonte that the
Oh yes, I remember this.
> previous maintainer(s) m
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:37:12AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> It's a skitch hazy, but I don't think there's an issue with
> distributing CC-BY and GPL code in the same tarball -- the only issue is
> this *MAY* result in GPL issues if *upstream* is GPL, if you'
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 01:06:27PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Paul Tagliamonte debian.org> writes:
>
> > So, the way *I* see this is so long as the GPL code isn't being put into
> > a combined work with anything (e.g. GPL'd patches), it *should* be OK.
>
> (Personally I think debian/ should be permissive, especially
> if there’s not too much “magic” in it… and others even think
> there should be no magic in it…)
I don't disagree, but I don't think this is inherently an issue.
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos
Cheers,
Paul
arly know how it works with GPL.)
> >>Commercial software does not need to be paid software. Well, to me a
> >>similar restriction like for GPL could be very handy: having to put
> >>all of the
> >>software under any OSS-compliant license as soon as an S-FSL program
> >>is incorporated (That would also limit possible interference with other
> >>licenses).
> >>Would that be acceptible?
> >I'm not exactly sure I understand what you mean here. If you mean that
> >any program or distribution that incorporates an S-FSL licensed program
> >will need to comply with the S-FSL license terms aswell, that will not
> >work. First of all, the S-FSL is not compatible with the GPL, so you
> >can't "link" it or integrate it with anything that is GPL'd.
> >Furthermore, DFSG#9: a license must not contaminate other, unrelated
> >software.
> no just compliance with any OSS-license like f.i. GPL so that S-FSL is
> 'compatible' to other licenses; see for S-FSL v1.3.3
>
>
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ness towards perfectly strict OSI compliance.
To be clear, not satisfying OSD 3 & 5 (DFSG 3 and 5 as well) this will
*NOT* be fit for Debian main. You're free to try to get it into
non-free.
Thanks!
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`.
Nov 08, 2013 at 06:03:35PM +, Elmar Stellnberger wrote:
> > You're free to try to get it into non-free.
> >
> >Thanks!
> > Paul
> >
> How to apply for acceptance in non-free?
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte
: :' : Proud Debian Develope
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 05:07:00PM +, Elmar Stellnberger wrote:
>
> Am 08.11.2013 16:33, schrieb Paul Tagliamonte:
> >On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 04:15:30PM +, Elmar Stellnberger wrote:
> >>>>"specific to someone": Well this is an unavoidable necessity
undistributable software (or force 3ed parties to hand over source?). I
can see the argument that says "no" to that.
For me, the question isn't "is this transitively linked" - but is it
transitively a derived work? I'd say some cases, yes, some, no.
Devilishly advo
(source code-)license
> (GPL-2+)?
Irrelevant. It's loaded at runtime, just as the GIMP would load a
non-free image. Totally fine. Those images just can't be in main.
> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2013/12/msg00236.html
>
> Thank you very much and Best Regard
reeplane
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
by
sending mail to ftpmaster@.
[ftpteam hat off]
ftpteam time is limited, so it's unlikely someone will give an official
judgement for every license emailed to us. I don't know where we as a
team stand on that, but that's my perception.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul
your approach. Some corners in the
> world might consider that term applies to bible-kjv-text. It has some
> parts they carefully avoided in sunday school.
>
> Christoph
Sure; but the question of intent is valid -- is the intent to 'excite'
the consumer or is it a work on it&#
and elsewhere in the world.
I think shooting games where you are fighting some force for ethical
good is more similar to pornography then child porn - I'd say games like
Postal 2, where you can kill innocent people for fun to be more similar
to that.
Again, I have not played this
Licenses must be compatable with each other or the resulting work isn't
distributable.
> Cheers,
> Nico
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://peop
ee stuff in the source
package must be stripped.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduc
tutions. Can you say anything about
> their interoperability and Debian compatibility of those licenses?
It appears that this would be a freely licensed work with compatable
licenses. I'd need to take a closer look to be sure, but it looks great
if that's a full and complete listing of l
as weird as well; I'd never come
> across anything like it.
The GPL has a neat clause wherein it allows you to disregard further
restrictions, so exceptions can only serve to relax any rules that the
GPL has -- which are *very* hard to use to create a nonfree work.
> --Nico
Cheers,
've missed that for years, thanks, Richard)
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
)
>
> http://video.fosdem.org/2014/H2213/Sunday/Taking_license_compatibility_semiseriously.webm
I watched it after you suggested it over IRC, but indeed it's great
stuff. Others on the list may take interest in it indeed.
> - RF
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamon
SCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/533b7cd9.3070...@pbandjelly.org
>
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R /
nse.
(I agree with Ian :) )
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signat
enerate it.
I'd email the author to see what he says before going much further.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`-
wasn't changed, the LICENSE file
contains more than just the license. At least, that's what I guess by
glancing at this file for a few seconds. I could be wrong.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C
ww.debian.org/legal/cryptoinmain for more information.
That includes the template that dak logs. Check the dak source for more
information on when that's triggered.
Thanks,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 73
debian-legal isn't the body that makes this decision, you might want
ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org
Thanks,
Paul
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 3:55 PM, James Wade wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> There seems to be some confusion over the PHP
mails from Ondřej it seems that the reject decision was made by
>the ftpmaster team, but as the argument for the decision was a legal one,
>so I think that debian-legal is appropriate.
... to discuss it. Not decide on critera.
>--
>Ferenc Kovács
>@Tyr43l - [4]
iance.org/cgit/core/alljoyn.git/tree/README.md
> [3]: https://www.debian.org/legal/cryptoinmain
Should be fine!
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
t the spirit of what we're doing in Debian - namely, how is
this work adding to liberated users.
> With regards,
> Paul van der Vlis.
Toodles,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
hould be noted in there.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
at, ISC) for debian/*, matching it to upstream *is*
good advice.
Either way, I stand by my email in <20150330190830.ga12...@helios.pault.ag>,
and 'check the copyright file' is the best advice for the original
question.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte |
Please re-read my last mail on this thread.
This conversation is going in circles.
Thanks,
Paul
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Op 24-03-15 om 21:21 schreef Don Armstrong:
>> On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
>>> Op 24-03-15 om 18:38 schreef Paul R. Tag
All of this is outside the scope of -legal. If you want to discuss
this, please bring this to -project.
Thanks.
Paul
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Op 31-03-15 om 22:40 schreef Paul Tagliamonte:
>> Please re-read my last mail on this thread.
&
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 09:32:12AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just had a discussion with an ftp-master who rejected one of my
> packages. The package in question is "missfits". It contains a
> directory, src/wcs/ with files that were originally released by Mark
> Calabretta under LGPL
doesn't appear to be the case, this looks like LGPLv2.1+ files were
modified by someone licensing their changes under GPLv3+, which is
legit. I believe treating this file as GPLv3+ is fine / good enough.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :
ich is
> > legit. I believe treating this file as GPLv3+ is fine / good enough.
>
> The reason here is not modification (although it makes this case clear),
> but redistribution. Upstream has chosen to redistribute the files under
> GPL-3+, and if we want to use these files, we h
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 04:06:52PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Paul Tagliamonte writes:
> > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 03:09:34PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> >> Same for me. However: the (L)GPL allows even an unmodified
> >> redistribution under a later license.
> &
The proof is on you -- where does it say you can relicense someone
else's copyrighted work / IP? Not *redistribute*, *relicense*.
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
Please end this thread, it's getting nuts. Ask the FSF if you're still unclear.
Thanks,
Paul
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 05:11:12PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> Again: please provide a reference for this. The c
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 05:43:21PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Paul Tagliamonte writes:
> > I don't know any jurisdiction where I can take a work of yours and now
> > claim I have the rights to it under a different license.
>
> Apple did, as I have shown. I think the
n merely
redistribute it under the terms of the GPLv3+, until I modify it, where
I can change the terms of the derived work, but *not* the original
works.
If I revert my changes, there's no reason it'd still be GPLv3+
I strongly think we actually agree, but are poorly expressing it :)
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer
: :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
`- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
This is not a DFSG free license, and it will be rejected from NEW if it's
sent there :)
Cheers,
Paul
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm seeking second opinion regarding mutation of the Expat license that can
> be found in [1]. In particular, author a
It can not.
Thanks,
Paul
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 October 2015 09:31:03 Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > This is not a DFSG free license, and it will be rejected from NEW if it's
> > sent there :)
>
> Understood, thanks.
CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC-BY-SA 4.0 are both DFSG free.
CC-BY-SA 2.5 is not.
Any CC license with -NC is nonfree.
Thanks!
Paul
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Oleksandr Gavenko
wrote:
> https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses have no conclusion about CC-BY
> 3.0/4.0
> licenses.
>
> My system (up to date
BY without SA is fine. ND and NC are not.
Its basically copyleft vs permissive. Non-SA works don't ensure derived
works are also in the Commons.
On Nov 1, 2015 3:22 PM, "Oleksandr Gavenko" wrote:
> On 2015-11-01, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>
> > CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC-B
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:23:22PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> Any other debian-legal regular willing to share his/her opinion?
Without looking further into it (anyone have a source package I can look
at?), any license that restricts use to only that of implementing a
standard (and not modifica
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 09:20:21PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> I'm cc'ing the rest of the ftp-master team; can someone reply with a bad
> source
> package (or d/copyright file) that we can evaluate in main?
(actually cc'ing them now)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
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 http://www.debian.org/>. Interesting qu
[ The following is the views of me, personally. They are not the views
of either the Debian FTP Team, nor those of the US Federal Government,
my employer ]
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 09:35:15PM +0100, Rytis wrote:
> US Goverment public domain issue has been discussed a few times in this
> mailing
Quote me on this:
ISC meets the DFSG, with my ftp hat on.
On Oct 22, 2016 12:46 PM, "Ben Finney" wrote:
> Jari Aalto writes:
>
> > Excellent summary Ben.
>
> Thank you for saying so.
>
> > Do you think, if it would be good if I added note about ISC license to
> > the Debian License information
>
> Lots of free software also is very much inspired by proprietary works,
> be they APIs, protocol or entire programs.
>
http://docs.ceph.com/docs/mimic/radosgw/s3/
paultag
> Ansgar
>
>
>
>
Hey Joel,
It should be outlined in the debian/copyright file for the package in
question
Paul
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:33 PM Joel Ray Holveck wrote:
> I'm currently asking my employer to let me upstream some changes I've
> got to some Debian packaging. Usually, they like to know what the
>
72 matches
Mail list logo
