> On Tue, 08 Nov 2016, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> I suppose, providing the full text would be even better. Here is
> the licence of RAR 5.3.b2-1 from Debian’s non-free repository:
> Copyright (c) 1993-2006 Alexander Roshal
> [...]
Where did you take this from? It doesn't agree with the
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> RAR is not part of Debian. It is in non-free. This means we do not
> like its licence.
Sure, there cannot be any doubt that this is non-free software.
The question is if the license that comes with it grants free
distribution.
>
Dmitry Alexandrov writes ("Re: Is the RAR archiver freely distributable?"):
> [Ian:]
> > We (Debian) cannot possibly agree to such a condition. It may well be
> > violated in Debian (even in main) already.
>
> I believe, that clause only implies ‘cracks’ or key generators for RAR.
Is it really
Hi all,
Maintainer here,
Will reply in full when at home - doing this by mobile at the moment.
If you look at the debian source, there is a copy of the original email
granting the redistribution rights in non-free, which solves one of the
issues being discussed here, I believe.
Will read
>> In a nutshell, the preamble of the new license seems to transform it
>> into a license agreement:
Sorry, I have not got the point. What it was before if not a licence agreement?
> To save others finding the licence, here it is:
>
>http://www.win-rar.com/winrarlicense.html?=0
I suppose,
Hello,
the license of the RAR archiver was changed some time ago:
http://www.win-rar.com/winrarlicense.html?=0
As compared to the previous version (which is still listed in the
copyright file of the Debian package):
6 matches
Mail list logo
