Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED
Sorry for the delay in answering to this mail! 2012/3/24 Andres Mejia amejia...@gmail.com: 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
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
On 12-03-24 at 11:06am, Andres Mejia wrote: On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Luca Falavigna ftpmas...@debian.org 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
Re: faac_1.28-4_amd64.changes REJECTED
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
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Luca Falavigna ftpmas...@debian.org 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
