Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Marco Ghirlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Knoppix should be distributing the source from the same location that you would get the CD, so its still compliant with the GPL. Really I couldn't find the sources of Knoppix anywhere. http://developer.linuxtag.net/knoppix/ looks like a good place to start. That's a result of googling for Knoppix source and taking the first hit. There's a link to that from the index file of a Knoppix CD. The fact seems that it is necessary for correct application of the GPL, but it is not respected so much indeed. So I have to publish for every *.deb a *-src.deb? Well, you have to publish the source in some convenient format -- a bunch of tar.gz's is fine, for example. The real issue comes when you are handing out or selling binary only cds. Those need to have a written offer for source valid for three years (for the GPL) I would point to the Debian Source, is it right? No. You need to provide it yourself -- you can't point to something which might fold up and vanish tomorrow. It has to be *you* providing the source, not you pointing to somebody who does. There's an exception to this, but it only kicks in if you're doing non-commercial distribution AND you received a written offer for source yourself. Debian provides no such offers. , or the source needs to be available at the same time for no extra cost. This I don't understand. Seems like I have to create an ISO with only the sources. Is there a program who download the sources for a given list of packages? 'xargs -ifoo apt-get source -d foo' -- the source debs are all sitting in one directory, it's not hard to programatically assemble their names and fetch the ones you want.. Not to seem un-ethical, but if MrKnoppix doesn't do this, why should I do it (I mean publish the sources cd) that I am a much smaller and derivative project? Klaus Knopper does do this. He's actually put a lot of thought into making sure that he, and those who redistribute his CDs, have a good way of complying with the GPL. Check the archives here, it was discussed this past summer. Or, check out The Man Himself at http://mailman.linuxtag.org/pipermail/debian-knoppix/2003-April/002425.html. As I said, Knopper's done his homework to help with this sort of situation. Anyway I'm still considering this possibility, cause Medialinux was born as a project for the students of our school, but it looks like it has many possibilities more... I'm just very sorry I have to tell to my users that they will not use this to look at their payed DVD, 'cause they have to pay for the software again. I wish someone here could help you with that, but the way copyright and patent laws are written right now, it would be very risky to do so. And that I need the double of the space on the server (that in our case is hosting us for free, in pure Linux tradition) to put also the sources. Hardly. Source is typically much smaller than the binary. Thanks so much, Marco Ghirlanda
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Scripsit Lucas Nussbaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marco Ghirlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This I don't understand. Seems like I have to create an ISO with only the sources. no. What you can do is add written offer to provide the sources to whoever ask for them, and, additionnally, point to Knoppix sources, Debian sources, and Christian Marillat's sources. The number of people directly asking you for the sources should be quite low ... However, most people would probably find it easier simply to offer the source code from the same FTP server in parallel with the binaries. It does not have to be ISO images [1]; separate files for each package should be fine. That way one does not have to bind oneself to keeping a 3-year backlog of old sources. (Why Knoppix does not do this, but it's their prerogative to do it the hard way if they choose to). Knoppix doesn't do that so they can have a written offer reusable by those who redistribute the CD. That's important for a project whose primary method of distribution is CDs at conferences. -Brian
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian T. Sniffen) wrote: Marco Ghirlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And that I need the double of the space on the server (that in our case is hosting us for free, in pure Linux tradition) to put also the sources. Hardly. Source is typically much smaller than the binary. Knopper said it took something like 3 CD's of source to make the 1 CD of binary. The dependencies are a killer. Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Knoppix should be distributing the source from the same location that you would get the CD, so its still compliant with the GPL. Really I couldn't find the sources of Knoppix anywhere. The fact seems that it is necessary for correct application of the GPL, but it is not respected so much indeed. So I have to publish for every *.deb a *-src.deb? The real issue comes when you are handing out or selling binary only cds. Those need to have a written offer for source valid for three years (for the GPL) I would point to the Debian Source, is it right? , or the source needs to be available at the same time for no extra cost. This I don't understand. Seems like I have to create an ISO with only the sources. Is there a program who download the sources for a given list of packages? Not to seem un-ethical, but if MrKnoppix doesn't do this, why should I do it (I mean publish the sources cd) that I am a much smaller and derivative project? Anyway I'm still considering this possibility, cause Medialinux was born as a project for the students of our school, but it looks like it has many possibilities more... I'm just very sorry I have to tell to my users that they will not use this to look at their payed DVD, 'cause they have to pay for the software again. And that I need the double of the space on the server (that in our case is hosting us for free, in pure Linux tradition) to put also the sources. Thanks so much, Marco Ghirlanda
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Marco Ghirlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Knoppix should be distributing the source from the same location that you would get the CD, so its still compliant with the GPL. Really I couldn't find the sources of Knoppix anywhere. Actually, Knoppix provides a written offer good for three years. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200304/msg00438.html for a summary of the situation. The fact seems that it is necessary for correct application of the GPL, but it is not respected so much indeed. So I have to publish for every *.deb a *-src.deb? Basically. The real issue comes when you are handing out or selling binary only cds. Those need to have a written offer for source valid for three years (for the GPL) I would point to the Debian Source, is it right? Nope. Debian has not made any guarantees that it will be around in three years. , or the source needs to be available at the same time for no extra cost. This I don't understand. Seems like I have to create an ISO with only the sources. Yes. Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:36:33PM +, Marco Ghirlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Knoppix should be distributing the source from the same location that you would get the CD, so its still compliant with the GPL. Really I couldn't find the sources of Knoppix anywhere. http://www.google.com/search?q=knoppix+sources first link. The real issue comes when you are handing out or selling binary only cds. Those need to have a written offer for source valid for three years (for the GPL) I would point to the Debian Source, is it right? You would have to provide the source yourself if asked to. , or the source needs to be available at the same time for no extra cost. This I don't understand. Seems like I have to create an ISO with only the sources. no. What you can do is add written offer to provide the sources to whoever ask for them, and, additionnally, point to Knoppix sources, Debian sources, and Christian Marillat's sources. The number of people directly asking you for the sources should be quite low ... Lucas
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Scripsit Lucas Nussbaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marco Ghirlanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This I don't understand. Seems like I have to create an ISO with only the sources. no. What you can do is add written offer to provide the sources to whoever ask for them, and, additionnally, point to Knoppix sources, Debian sources, and Christian Marillat's sources. The number of people directly asking you for the sources should be quite low ... However, most people would probably find it easier simply to offer the source code from the same FTP server in parallel with the binaries. It does not have to be ISO images [1]; separate files for each package should be fine. That way one does not have to bind oneself to keeping a 3-year backlog of old sources. (Why Knoppix does not do this, but it's their prerogative to do it the hard way if they choose to). [1] However, ISO images might discourage people from downloading if they only want source for a single package, and thus save on bandwidth. -- Henning Makholm Gå ud i solen eller regnen, smil, køb en ny trøje, slå en sludder af med købmanden, puds dine støvler. Lev!
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
[Marco: The primary function of this list is to discuss licenses and the legal ramifications of those licenses. As none (or almost none) of us are lawyers, we cannot give legal advice. The following is not legal advice either.] On Sat, 08 Nov 2003, Marco Ghirlanda wrote: The fact is that I would like to know if there is a legal risk, in Italy or in the world to distribute on a cd .deb's from http://marillat.free.fr/dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/ (like libdvdcss2 or mplayer, or w32codecs, and so on...). There may be a legal risk. I have no idea about Italy's laws, but there remains a very real possibility that libdvdcss will be actionable under the DMCA in the US. To be sure would I need to remove all this software and include only packages from the main section (excluding also contrib and non-free sections?). As far as we know, packages in main are legal to distribute pretty much everywhere. You may need to remove the encryption parts in certain countries, although I don't think that applies to Italy. However, as most of us are not attorneys, and as such, not allowed to practice law in Italy, you should probably consider approaching someone knowledgeable in the laws of your locality who can give you more detailed and accurate information regarding the laws and how they interact with software. Don Armstrong -- THERE IS NO GRAVITY THE WORLD SUCKS -- Vietnam War Penquin Lighter http://gallery.donarmstrong.com/clippings/vietnam_there_is_no_gravity.jpg http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [Marco: The primary function of this list is to discuss licenses and the legal ramifications of those licenses. As none (or almost none) of us are lawyers, we cannot give legal advice. The following is not legal advice either.] As far as we know, packages in main are legal to distribute pretty much everywhere. You may need to remove the encryption parts in certain countries, although I don't think that applies to Italy. You also should remember to distribute source where you are required to do so -- for all GPL'd packages you get from Debian, for example, you must distribute the source. However, as most of us are not attorneys, and as such, not allowed to practice law in Italy, you should probably consider approaching someone knowledgeable in the laws of your locality who can give you more detailed and accurate information regarding the laws and how they interact with software. -Brian -- Brian T. Sniffen[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.evenmere.org/~bts/
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
First of all thank you! [Marco: The primary function of this list is to discuss licenses and the legal ramifications of those licenses. As none (or almost none) of us are lawyers, we cannot give legal advice. The following is not legal advice either.] Sorry for expressing myself in the wrong way. I just asked a point to the right direction... Mahesh T. Pai told me to look at the Debian Policy Manual, wich I found so much interesting and wich I'm currently reading. There may be a legal risk. I have no idea about Italy's laws, but there remains a very real possibility that libdvdcss will be actionable under the DMCA in the US. So most of all Knoppix Based Distro's are on charge for this in the US? Will they come to me and ask for money? And if I have to distributer the source, then Knoppix itself it infringing this? Anyway I was thinking of removing the dvd libraries by myself, cause I can't figure out how it is going to go... As far as we know, packages in main are legal to distribute pretty much everywhere. You may need to remove the encryption parts in certain countries, although I don't think that applies to Italy. Still the server is in the US, so I think this applies. However, as most of us are not attorneys, and as such, not allowed to practice law in Italy, you should probably consider approaching someone knowledgeable in the laws of your locality who can give you more detailed and accurate information regarding the laws and how they interact with software. Sorry, but I just asked. I just wanted to know if there was a list that would go beyond the official main, contrib and non-free distinctions to help people like to me not to have to pay for a lawyer... ;-) It seems that my next CD is going to be more GPL compliant, anyway. At least is what I understand from your answers, Thank you again, Marco Ghirlanda
Re: Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Marco Ghirlanda wrote: And if I have to distributer the source, then Knoppix itself it infringing this? It seems that my next CD is going to be more GPL compliant, anyway. At least is what I understand from your answers, Knoppix should be distributing the source from the same location that you would get the CD, so its still compliant with the GPL. The real issue comes when you are handing out or selling binary only cds. Those need to have a written offer for source valid for three years (for the GPL), or the source needs to be available at the same time for no extra cost. [If you were handing them out, you'd just have two piles, a binary only, and a source only cd.] The GPL is generally the strictest license we have regarding source... but so long as you offer it at the same time you are distributing the binaries for no extra cost (beyond media), it's fine. Don Armstrong -- There's nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself. -- Bach http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Legality of .DEBS in Medialinux.
Hi, I'm Marco Ghirlanda, Linux Advisor at the Virtual Reality and Multi Media Park of Turin, Italy. (www.vrmmp.it). We developed for our Open Source Lab (www.opensourcelab.it) a remastered version of the Knoppix Live Cd, Medialinux, wich includes most ot the audio, graphic and video software that is in the Debian collection of packages. This Cd was primarly done for testing purposes and to make our students try the linux + multi media softwares without too many problems. I've included many software from external repositories, but I didn't take care (until now) about the legal conseguences of this action. The fact is that I would like to know if there is a legal risk, in Italy or in the world to distribute on a cd .deb's from http://marillat.free.fr/dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/ (like libdvdcss2 or mplayer, or w32codecs, and so on...). To be sure would I need to remove all this software and include only packages from the main section (excluding also contrib and non-free sections?). I'm surely a bit confused... Full list of packages is at ftp://209.50.230.46/medialinux/debs(list_of_software).txt I'm very new to this part of the Linux Story and I will like some advices on where to start Thanks in advance to everybody who is going to answer this post, Marco Ghirlanda
