On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 03:45:29 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jul 2007, Steve King wrote:
> > > You'll notice that we have no permission to distribute modified
> > > versions of dcraw.c as required by the DFSG.
> >
> > I don't agree with you here. It seems to me that we do have
> > permission to distribute modified versions, provided source is
> > included.
>
> The license does not explicitely grant the ability to create a
> derivative work and distribute that work. It merely talks about
> "lawfully redistributing this code".
>
> Since it fails to specifically grant that right, we must assume that
> the default state ("All rights reserved") applies.For the record, I agree with Don's analysis. > > > > Secondly, it appears that we must include full source code if > > > we've modified dcraw.c, but we don't do that. We distribute source > > > alongside. > > > > All that is required in this license is a link to David's home page. > > The build process does not modify the file dcraw.c, so the footnote > > clause is applicable to this version of dcraw that would be included > > in debian. > > dcraw.c itself isn't currently modfied, but the package does form a > derivative work at some level. You can likely argue either way, but > given that a need to apply a security patch to dcraw would cause us to > run afoul of the license makes it rather problematic from where I'm > sitting. Again, I agree with Don. Disclaimers: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP. -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpQl9PtTrRA3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
