The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to gmane.linux.debian.devel.legal as well.
Cord Beermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I want to add a package to Debian with the following > License-Statement: Does this mean you are the sole copyright holder? Or is this a work derived from someone else's work? What is the license of that existing work? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > The Simple PHP Blog is released under the GNU Public License. There's no such license. You probably mean the "GNU General Public License, version 2 or, at your option, any later version". > You are free to use and modify the Simple PHP Blog. All changes must > be uploaded to SourceForge.net under Simple PHP Blog. This is an unreasonable requirement; the recipient may have no means of satisfying this, but your license terms demand they do so anyway. It also contradicts the GNU GPL: you're placing an extra restriction on the recipient which isn't already in the GPL. This makes the work unredistributable, because no redistributor can satisfy both the GPL and your extra restriction. > Credit must be give to the original author Fine; this is already part of the GNU GPL version 2. > and the Simple PHP Blog logo graphic must appear on the site and > link to the project on SourceForge.net This is an extra restriction, and has exactly the same problem as discussed above. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Does this make the package incompatible to DFSG? It currently is self-contradictory, which means no recipient can distribute it at all. > PS: Please keep the Cc on the wnpp-bug #421513 -- \ "Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have | `\ to murder a loved one because they're the devil." -- Emo | _o__) Philips | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]