Hi, From: Tatsuya Kinoshita Subject: Re: Bug#445020: edict & kanjidic: License discrepancy between the Debian package and upstream, upstream's license being non-free Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 08:20:15 +0900 (JST)
> On October 3, 2007 at 3:16AM +0900, > nori1 (at dolphin.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp) wrote: > > > Package: edict > > Version: 2006.10.09-1 > > Severity: serious > > Justification: Policy 2.2.1 > [...] > > Current license for edict and kanjidic seems to be CC by-sa 2.5, which > > is different from a custom license described in debian/copyright and > > is not DFSG-free. IMHO the best solution for this situation is > > proposing an upgrade of the license to CC by-sa 3.0 and including > > licence.html in the source packages. > > I think this bug violates Policy 12.5, not 2.2.1 if CC by-sa 2.5 > can be upgraded to CC by-sa 3.0 and then meets DFSG. > > The point is the incorrect information in debian/copyright. For > now, please update debian/copyright as follows: > > - include the upstream statement quoting from > http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/edrdg/licence.html > - mention that the Debian package is distributed under CC by-sa 3.0 > according to section 4.b of CC by-sa 2.5 > - include a verbatim copy of CC by-sa 3.0 quoting from > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode I missed what Tatsuya pointed out, i.e. distribution under the later versions of the same license. Now I agree with Tatsuya. So, I think as follows: - The minimal solution for packages in all the distribution would be to fix debian/copyright as Tatsuya suggested. - The best solution for packages in lenny and sid would be proposing the upstream for license upgrade as I suggested in the first mail. Many thanks, -nori -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
