On 11 Mar, Frederic Peters wrote: > Dan Jacobson wrote: > >> These comments are missing: >> F> Does this look like it would be an appropriate patch ? : >> F> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=275134 >> I'll trust you and skip looking at source on my modem. > > I'll build a test package tomorrow. > > >> F> The author decided in his full right he doesn't want people to copy >> F> the file. You could either ask the author to remove this flag or >> F> provide me a patch adding an option to override author choice. >> >> I can't write the code, but I'll help with the excuse: >> "...for example Bob wants to read Bill's document at leisure on his PDA. >> Unfortunately, Bill is long gone, so cannot change the permission to >> allow Bob to convert the document, therefore we add options to allow >> users to override author choices." > > Sure there are plenty of good cases against DRM. Creating a patch > shouldn't be hard but I'm not sure I'll have time tomorrow.
Here's my problem with this... I distribute software (Xpdf) under the GPL. (And Debian also distributes a lot of GPL software, obviously.) What if someone came along and said, "hey cool, I'll take it", and incorprorated GPL code into their non-GPL application? What if, when they were confronted, they said "I don't like the GPL -- and there are plenty of good cases against it, so I'm just going to ignore it." I can't, in good conscience, ask people to abide by my request (if you use my source code, please release your source code too), and then turn around and completely ignore another author's request. Frankly, I'm rather surprised that Debian has such a cavlier attitude toward other author's requests, given their own very strong attitude with regard to the GPL. Don't get me wrong -- I don't particularly like DRM either, and if Debian were campaigning to convince people not to use it, I'd be happy to see it. But simply blowing off an author like that is, in my opinion, rather hypocritical. On this point, the GPL (section 2a) says "You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change." If Debian is in fact distributing a version of Xpdf modified to ignore the permission settings, does your modified version carry the required "prominent notice"? If not, I respectfully request that you add such a notice. - Derek -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
