Re: review of DK and IIM patent licenses

2004-11-11 Thread MJ Ray
I have not read the patents, so I have no idea what these apply to and I suspect it's better that I shouldn't know. Daniel Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is the IIM license: http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-fenton-identified-mail-00.txt This contaminates other software, by

Re: review of DK and IIM patent licenses

2004-11-11 Thread Matthew Garrett
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have not read the patents, so I have no idea what these apply to and I suspect it's better that I shouldn't know. Daniel Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is the IIM license: http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-fenton-identified-mail-00.txt

Re: review of DK and IIM patent licenses

2004-11-11 Thread MJ Ray
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This contaminates other software, by terminating for any patent action against Cisco about anything. It even seems to contaminate hardware! Note that it only terminates the patent license, which just takes us back to

Bug#280803: libgcc1: contains non-free GNU FDL

2004-11-11 Thread Matthias Klose
Brian M. Carlson writes: Package: libgcc1 Version: 1:4.0-0pre0 Severity: serious The copyright file includes a copy of the GNU Free Documentation License, which has been judged by debian-legal to be non-free. Please remove the non-free material from the package or move the package to

turck-mmcache license violation?

2004-11-11 Thread Andres Salomon
It would appear that turck-mmcache is covered under the GPL. However, it links against php4, whose license is incompatible w/ the GPL. Is there some sort of exception clause that was left out of the copyright file, or are we violating the turck-mmcache license?

Re: turck-mmcache license violation?

2004-11-11 Thread cascardo
One could claim that php4 is part of the operating system, just like they do with OpenSSL. That is nuts! Sorry for introducing a reason for a flame. I'd just like to say that I think the if one line is to be crossed, that should mean that we should ask for the author permission, which would make

Bug#280803: libgcc1: contains non-free GNU FDL

2004-11-11 Thread Don Armstrong
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Matthias Klose wrote: The copyright file includes a copy of the GNU Free Documentation License, which has been judged by debian-legal to be non-free. Please remove the non-free material from the package or move the package to non-free. I do not want to believe that

Re: turck-mmcache license violation?

2004-11-11 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 08:12:42PM -0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One could claim that php4 is part of the operating system, just like they do with OpenSSL. That is nuts! The phrase unless that component itself accompanies the executable means that Debian can never make use of that exception,

Re: turck-mmcache license violation?

2004-11-11 Thread Francesco Poli
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:12:42 -0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One could claim that php4 is part of the operating system, just like they do with OpenSSL. That is nuts! I agree with you that claiming PHP is part of the OS is a bit hard... But anyway, Debian cannot ever use the OS exception, since