[Pkg-xen-devel] Bug#391935: Bug #391935: Re: The answer from Citrix & Xen.org

[Ben Finney]

On 07-Oct-2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 07 octobre 2008 à 12:48 +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
> > Yes, we do need more detail; we need to know that *any* recipient 
> > of Debian can redistribute the work to anyone else, modified or 
> > unmodified, commercially or otherwise. (Or to know that these 
> > actions are not allowed, so that we can remove the package from 
> > Debian.)
> 
> As for the "modified or unmodified", I think we have already 
> considered it acceptable to require a name change for significant 
> modifications made by third-party distributors. For example, though 
> I’m not sure, I think this is already the case for Apache.

I don't know whether you're saying Debian itself would be exempt from 
such a requirement.

The Debian project's license to freely redistribute works, modified or 
unmodified, must not be specific to Debian as per DFSG §8. The license 
to do so must extend to all “third-party distributors” when they get 
the work from Debian.

If the work will be modified in Debian, and if that would require a 
name change under the trademark license, presumably we have another 
“Firefox” → “Iceweasel” situation and would have to rename the work 
ourselves in order to redistribute it in Debian.

It all depends on what the license terms actually require, though, so 
hopefully we can get answers from upstream.

> I’ll ask for clarifications about the rest.

Thanks.

-- 
 \          “Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without |
  `\      having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it |
_o__)                                             too?” —Douglas Adams |
Ben Finney <ben at benfinney.id.au>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/attachments/20081007/fe676231/attachment.pgp