On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 10:05:01PM +0200, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Their line of reasoning is that it such a clause is present in several > other licenses: the APSL, RPSL, MPL and Jabber licenses. The APSL and > RPSL are non-free, so that's not a problem. IIRC, the MPL was said to be > problematic because of the clauses talking about patents, not about that > one. However, the Jabber license is considered DFSG-free. > > Unless I'm missing something, we are not respecting these licenses when > distributing Mozilla and Jabber in the unstable tree, where the source > files aren't kept for 6 months as they should. I don't recall seeing > this discussion before, and it strikes me, as, DFSG-free or not, we are > violating these people's copyrights. Is there a way to deal with such an > issue?
I don't know for jabber, but mozilla is tri-licensed MPL/GPL/LGPL... We don't need to fulfil the MPL. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
