On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:25:14 +0100, Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think this argument is moderately persuasive. DFSG 4 allows a > license to require a name change on modification. If Debian is > granted an extra permission to keep the name the same, but that > freedom is not passed on to downstream recipients, is the license > free? It could be argued that DFSG 8 forbids that, but if Debian > isn't granted that freedom then the license /is/ free. I think any > interpretation of the DFSG that results in a free license becoming > non-free if extra permissions are granted (even if those permissions > are only to some people) ought to be incorrect. While this argument was indeed tempting, I think we also need to look at how free the resulting package is: Can a derivbative take any package in main, modify it, and further redistribute it? If yes, then the package can remain in main, and is free; if not, then the package is not free. Freedoms granted to users are what is important, not just freedoms granted to Debian. If it turns out that we rename the program (to, say, debian-firefox), and that grants our users the freedom to modify and further distribute the renamed binary; but not renaming robs them of this freedom, then our course is clear. manoj -- "Survey says..." Richard Dawson, weenie, on "Family Feud" Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]