Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 06:51:15PM -0500, Karl Fogel wrote: >> Is public domain software DFSG-compliant? >> >> Sorry if this is a FAQ; I couldn't find the answer anywhere on the >> Debian web site. I am asking after reading this text on >> http://www.debian.org/intro/free: >> >> "Truly free software is always free. Software that is placed in the >> public domain can be snapped up and put into non-free programs. >> Any improvements then made are lost to society. To stay free, >> software must be copyrighted and licensed." > > Why does that page say this? This is the FSF's agenda, not Debian's, > and claims that the X11 and other simple, permissive licenses are not > "truly free", which is ridiculous. I don't think an "intro to Free > Software" on Debian's site should be making such a statement. > > There may be practical problems with public domain in some jurisdictions, > but that aside, it, as well as permissive, non-copyleft licenses, are > certainly "truly"- and DFSG-free.
Thanks for the responses (from you and Barak Pearlmutter). Now it seems clear that public domain softwaer is DFSG-compliant, despite what the above page says. A suggestion: If Debian internally has a list of licenses considered DFSG-compliant (and others DFSG-noncompliant) by the project, it might be good to publish that list on a web page. The FSF does something similar at: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html and the OSI likewise at: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ I didn't find any similar list posted by Debian. If there were one, public domain status could be included on it. >> Please CC me on any responses; I'm not subscribed to this list. > > Please set your Mail-Followup-To header accordingly. Thanks. I didn't know about that; now I've started using it. -Karl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
