Bug#524732: simutrans: license is not Artistic as in common-licenses

[Ansgar Burchardt]

Hi,

"Francesco Poli (t1000)" <frx at firenze.linux.it> writes:

> Hence, it's OK that the license text is quoted in full in the
> debian/copyright file, but it's *not* OK that this license is called
> "Artistic", since the copyright file format specification
> (http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat?action=recall&rev=226)
> defines "Artistic" as "The original Artistic license, as seen in
> /usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic".
>
> Please change the misleading label to something more appropriate
> (probably "other").

Correct, this might be misleading.  However, in the current DEP-5
the "as seen in ..." was dropped.  I am not sure what is the intention
to do in this case.

FYI, the version of the Artistic license that Simutrans uses can also
be found on the OSI web page:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php

> Moreover, I cannot find any debian-legal thread about this modified
> Artistic license for Simutrans.
> Was this license analyzed in order to check that simutrans really
> belongs in Debian main?  Could you point me to the relevant thread?
> I fear that mislabelling the license as "Artistic" could have caused
> some easy & fast "It's OK for main" conclusion...

There is no thread on debian-legal about this license (there is also no
requirement for such a thread).  Do you see any problem with this
particular license?

I have at least read the license text and compared it with the Artistic
license in /usr/share/common-license and did not see any problem myself.

Regards,
Ansgar