Java3D license incompatible with DFSG?

2012-09-15 Thread Eric Smith
In the course of trying to package Java3D for Fedora, Tom Calloway brought to my attention that the Java3D license includes the following statement: * You acknowledge that this software is not designed, licensed or * intended for use in the design, construction, operation or * maintenance of

Re: Java3D license incompatible with DFSG?

2012-09-15 Thread Ben Finney
Eric Smith e...@brouhaha.com writes: In the course of trying to package Java3D for Fedora, Tom Calloway brought to my attention that the Java3D license includes the following statement: * You acknowledge that this software is not designed, licensed or * intended for use in the design,

Re: Java3D license incompatible with DFSG?

2012-09-15 Thread Ben Finney
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes: I don't think we should rely on either interpretation; ambiguity in copyright licenses is dangerous. My advice is to seek a better license statement from the copyright holder which makes it clear what the clause means. In particular, if the

Re: Java3D license incompatible with DFSG?

2012-09-15 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au [120915 11:47]: Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes: I don't think we should rely on either interpretation; ambiguity in copyright licenses is dangerous. My advice is to seek a better license statement from the copyright holder which

Re: Bug#687693: ca-certificates: Cacert License is missing

2012-09-15 Thread Raphael Geissert
Hi everyone, mejiko: thanks for pointing it out, I'm forwarding your report to our debian-legal mailing list to seek their opinion. On Saturday 15 September 2012 03:15:10 mejiko wrote: [...] ca-certificates packeages included Cacert Root certificates. This certificates licensed under Cacert

Bug#687693: marked as forwarded (ca-certificates: Cacert License is missing)

2012-09-15 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sat, 15 Sep 2012 12:35:09 -0500 with message-id 201209151235.10044.geiss...@debian.org has caused the report #687693, regarding ca-certificates: Cacert License is missing to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstream software author(s) debian-legal@lists.debian.org

Re: Java3D license incompatible with DFSG?

2012-09-15 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 01:52:54AM -0600, Eric Smith wrote: In the course of trying to package Java3D for Fedora, Tom Calloway brought to my attention that the Java3D license includes the following statement: * You acknowledge that this software is not designed, licensed or * intended for

Re: Java3D license incompatible with DFSG?

2012-09-15 Thread Eric Smith
I quoted from the Sun license on Java3D: * You acknowledge that this software is not designed, licensed or * intended for use in the design, construction, operation or * maintenance of any nuclear facility. Steve Langasek wrote: This is a standard No warranty clause wrt nuclear facilities in

Re: New package algol68toc: terms of the copyright.

2012-09-15 Thread Christofer C. Bell
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org wrote: 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

Re: New package algol68toc: terms of the copyright.

2012-09-15 Thread Paul Wise
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 7:19 AM, Christofer C. Bell wrote: I'd not be so quick to retract those comments! I agree it fails the dissident test. One is not able to contribute anonymously. You must identify the organization you are a part of (and what is an organization, anyway?). And what