Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Ian Jackson
Miriam Ruiz writes (Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer): But, regardless of abstract debates, this is what I consider the most likely outcome of such situation, if it ever appears. Imagine someone packages the software including that restriction and uploads it to the archive. It would

Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts

2015-03-31 Thread Paul Tagliamonte
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 02:28:40PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Ben Finney writes (Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts): For free software, this forum normally recommends that the Debian packaging copyright holders should choose to grant the same license to the Debian packaging files as

Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts

2015-03-31 Thread Ian Jackson
Paul Tagliamonte writes (Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts): On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 02:28:40PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Ben Finney writes (Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts): For free software, this forum normally recommends that the Debian packaging copyright holders

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Paul Tagliamonte
Please re-read my last mail on this thread. This conversation is going in circles. Thanks, Paul On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Paul van der Vlis p...@vandervlis.nl wrote: Op 24-03-15 om 21:21 schreef Don Armstrong: On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Paul van der Vlis wrote: Op 24-03-15 om 18:38

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Paul van der Vlis
Op 24-03-15 om 21:21 schreef Don Armstrong: On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Paul van der Vlis wrote: Op 24-03-15 om 18:38 schreef Paul R. Tagliamonte: Unless it allows modification and redistribution of this (and we do so), What when the DD who packages it, would package it with the 5 user limitation?

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015, Paul van der Vlis wrote: Do you know an example of software what is distributed by Debian when it's clear the development team behind it, doesn't want that? cdrecord is a prominent example, where the developer was vehemently against Debian distributing it, and also

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Paul van der Vlis
Op 30-03-15 om 03:33 schreef Riley Baird: Do you think RedHat Enterprise Linux is non-free software too? https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/catalog.html Yes, it is. The trademark restrictions of Red Hat prevent you from distributing isos compiled from the source. So far I know Centos and

Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts

2015-03-31 Thread Ian Jackson
Ben Finney writes (Re: License for Debian Maintainer Scripts): For free software, this forum normally recommends that the Debian packaging copyright holders should choose to grant the same license to the Debian packaging files as the general license for the upstream work. I disagree both with

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Paul van der Vlis
Op 31-03-15 om 22:40 schreef Paul Tagliamonte: Please re-read my last mail on this thread. This conversation is going in circles. I bring 4 new points in the discussion in this mail. 1: I've spoken to the developer and he does not want the name of his program into this discussion. In his

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Paul Tagliamonte
All of this is outside the scope of -legal. If you want to discuss this, please bring this to -project. Thanks. Paul On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Paul van der Vlis p...@vandervlis.nl wrote: Op 31-03-15 om 22:40 schreef Paul Tagliamonte: Please re-read my last mail on this thread. This

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer

2015-03-31 Thread Riley Baird
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 23:06:57 +0200 Paul van der Vlis p...@vandervlis.nl wrote: Op 30-03-15 om 03:33 schreef Riley Baird: Do you think RedHat Enterprise Linux is non-free software too? https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/catalog.html Yes, it is. The trademark restrictions of Red Hat