Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED

2012-03-24 Thread Andres Mejia
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Luca Falavigna  wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Copyright says:
>
>  "Those intending to use this software module in hardware or software
>  products are advised that this use may infringe existing patents."
>
> This conflicts with http://www.debian.org/legal/patent, Policy statement §1.
>
> Cheers,
> Luca
>
>
>
> ===
>
> Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
> your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
> concerns.

Hi,
I read the policy statement, but it's not clear to me how policy
statement 1 applies to this line. The copyright disclaimer above says
"...this use *may* infringe existing patents." This doesn't make it
clear that this software module *does* or *does not* infringe existing
patents. I don't believe this makes the situation any different than
packages (both multimedia related and non-multimedia related) that are
distributed in main.

Note that faac is proposed for inclusion in non-free for a different
reason. It has to do with this statement.

"Copyright is not released for non MPEG-2 NBC/MPEG-4 Audio conforming products."

For a discussion on the matter whether or not faac is at least
redistributable, see [1].

1. http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2009-April/060411.html

-- 
~ Andres

___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers


Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED

2012-03-26 Thread Fabian Greffrath

Am 24.03.2012 16:06, schrieb Andres Mejia:

I read the policy statement, but it's not clear to me how policy
statement 1 applies to this line. The copyright disclaimer above says
"...this use *may* infringe existing patents." This doesn't make it
clear that this software module *does* or *does not* infringe existing
patents. I don't believe this makes the situation any different than
packages (both multimedia related and non-multimedia related) that are
distributed in main.


Seconded. I don't think that this should be a valid reason for REJECT, 
either. The statement that the given software *may* infringe patents 
applies to about every other software package currently in Debian.


 - Fabian


___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers


Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED

2012-05-22 Thread Luca Falavigna
Sorry for the delay in answering to this mail!

2012/3/24 Andres Mejia :
> I read the policy statement, but it's not clear to me how policy
> statement 1 applies to this line. The copyright disclaimer above says
> "...this use *may* infringe existing patents." This doesn't make it
> clear that this software module *does* or *does not* infringe existing
> patents. I don't believe this makes the situation any different than
> packages (both multimedia related and non-multimedia related) that are
> distributed in main.

Given there is uncertainty about whether a patent is infringed or now,
would it be possible to ask upstream to drop that line from the
copyright statement?

___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers


Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED

2012-05-22 Thread Fabian Greffrath
> Given there is uncertainty about whether a patent is infringed or now,
> would it be possible to ask upstream to drop that line from the
> copyright statement?

Unfortunately, the FAAC devs are not upstream to this code, it's
"property" of MPEG. And the last sentence of the statement is "This
copyright notice must be included in all copies or derivative works." so
the FAAC devs are not allowed to drop it even if they wanted.

Looks like we are kept check wrt FAAC. :/

 - Fabian


___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers


Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED

2012-05-22 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-03-24 at 11:06am, Andres Mejia wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Luca Falavigna  
> wrote:
> > Copyright says:
> >
> >  "Those intending to use this software module in hardware or 
> > software  products are advised that this use may infringe existing 
> > patents."
> >
> > This conflicts with http://www.debian.org/legal/patent, Policy 
> > statement §1.
[snip]
> I read the policy statement, but it's not clear to me how policy 
> statement 1 applies to this line. The copyright disclaimer above says 
> "...this use *may* infringe existing patents." This doesn't make it 
> clear that this software module *does* or *does not* infringe existing 
> patents. I don't believe this makes the situation any different than 
> packages (both multimedia related and non-multimedia related) that are 
> distributed in main.

I agree with Andres: it is a disclaimer, and is IMO similar to "this hat 
ma kill you (if e.g. crossing a street and a driver gets distracted by 
it and runs you over)".


 - Jonas

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

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers