Re: foremost package - Licence of debian/* files
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Charles Plessy wrote: I would rather suggest a license more in line with public domain works, such as Creative Commons zero license, the SQLite public domain dedication, or the GNU all-permissive license. For software works, I don't think this group should be recommending public domain. The SQLite dedication lacks a fallback license, the CC0 license explicitly withholds a patent license, and the unlicense has not had legal review. The GNU all-permissive license doesn't include the word use, which is an implicit patent grant. When a recommendation from this group is possible for a permissive work, I'd propose Apache 2.0 and Expat/MIT style license if at all possible since it protects both the one dedicating the work and also those who would incorporate the work in larger compositions. I'm not a Lawyer, This is not Legal Advice. Best, Clark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1334414385.28272.140661062351373.743ee...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Re: foremost package - Licence of debian/* files
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 09:33:06PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: Hi, I see [1] that the package is currently public domain, except for a couple of files, which are instead copyrighted and released under the terms of the GNU GPL v2 or later. [1] http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/f/foremost/current/copyright Yes, that's right. Concerning that topic, I've emailed upstream maintainers because the software is said to be in public domain, but file extract.c has a copyright line. Hence I wonder: why would you want to gratuitously restrict the whole package to GPL-3+ just because of debian/* ? I would suggest licensing debian/* files under GPL-2+ for consistency with the packaged work. I'm not an expert in licences, that's why I CC-ed debian-legal. I really appreciate your suggestions and, if former maintainers agree, GPL-2+ is the licence I will grant to debian/* files. PS: Please, CC me because I am not in debian-legal mailing list. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: foremost package - Licence of debian/* files
Le Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 09:33:06PM +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:36:22 -0300 Raúl Benencia wrote: I see [1] that the package is currently public domain, except for a couple of files, which are instead copyrighted and released under the terms of the GNU GPL v2 or later. [1] http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/f/foremost/current/copyright Hence I wonder: why would you want to gratuitously restrict the whole package to GPL-3+ just because of debian/* ? I would suggest licensing debian/* files under GPL-2+ for consistency with the packaged work. Actually, the only evidence I see for api.c and ole.h being GPL-2+ is the statement on Chicago's project page on SourceForge. http://sourceforge.net/projects/chicago/develop I would rather suggest a license more in line with public domain works, such as Creative Commons zero license, the SQLite public domain dedication, or the GNU all-permissive license. http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ http://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/License-Notices-for-Other-Files.html Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120414032407.gc4...@falafel.plessy.net
