Follow-up Comment #15, task #15711 (project administration): [comment #14 comment #14:] > > No, I don't understand.
Good; I'll try to explain. Copyright and license notices in every file help avoid uncertainty about what rights are given to the user. If a tarball has one statement about it in a central place like README, it makes the situation clear _for that tarball_; however, programmers often copy files from one package to another. If a file contains no notices, that information is lost, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html. Now, from user's point of view, it doesn't matter whether the file was written by the original package maintainer (in fact, the term itself may have little sense): the users get the whole tarball, and they get it from the person who releases it. It's that person who is responsible for its full contents. In other words, whenever you put a file into your tarball, it becames _your_ file. As I already pointed out, you can't include proprietary software in your tarball, even when it's written by other people. > Do I also need to change the included dependencies files by addition of legal notices to each of them? Does it violate their licence terms? I can see nothing in those terms that would prohibit adding that data to the covered files. Do I miss anything? _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?15711> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.nongnu.org/
