[SCM] snd packaging branch, master, updated. debian/11.7-1-2-g96ae8f5

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 01:12:06PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:25:24 (EDT), mira-guest at users.alioth.debian.org wrote:
>
>> +Files: ./DotEmacs
>> +Copyright: 2001 Fernando Lopez Lezcano <nando at ccrma.stanford.edu>
>> +License: no licence mentioned
>
><pedantic>
>uh, does no license mean "all rights reserved" and are we actually
>allowed to redistribute it?
></pedantic>
>
>more seriously, are files in that directory installed in the binary
>package?
>
>asking because this package was just rejected for missing copyright
>statements.

I don't find the question too pedantic.  And it is serious even if only 
shipped with source!

If files lacking licnesing do not have same copyright holder, then we 
cannot safely assume that it is licensed similarly (as it is someone 
else who then need to grant us the licensing).

If files lacking licensing do have same copyright holder as other files 
of same code project which is properly licensed, then it still isn't 
"safe" to assume same licensing, but more likely.

In both cases it is off course the best to contact the copyright holder 
and request an explicit statement of licensing - and (if not the same) 
pass that statement to the upstream maintainer for inclusion in the code 
project.


Kind regards,

  - Jonas

-- 
  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
  * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20100714/a4d76d29/attachment.pgp>