>>
>> I got this bug report on the Debian BTS.
>>
>>   libxml2 testsuite includes several testfiles that are unclear if
they
>>   are DFSG free. These seem to downloaded from various websites,
without
>>   being aware that typically websited do not allow redistributing
their
>>   content without permissions.
>>
>>   Atleast the following files were spotted to be probably nonfree
>material
>>
>>   test/HTML/fp40.htm   - Microsoft Frontpage readme file
>>   test/HTML/wired.html - Wired.com frontpage
>>   test/HTML/test2.html - Old linuxtoday.com page
>>   test/slashdot.rdf    - slashdot rss feed
>>   test/slashdot.xml    - slashdot rss feed
>>   test/slashdot16.xml  - slashdot rss feed
>>   test/wap.xml         - <!-- (C) 1999, 2000 WAP Forum Ltd.  All
rights
>>   reserved -->
>>
>> While it is an obvious issue for Debian, it is also one for libxml2
>> upstream, that I think you should do something about.
>
>  If you really care about it provide a patch which randomizes the
content
>of those but keep the structure, it will still test the parser as it
should
>and I think it would avoid the problem of redistributing the content. I
>doubt
>one can consider reusing a document structure to be a content copyright
>infrigement.
>  I take patches :-), it will of course also affect the structure.

What about the rest of test file, are they licensed under MIT same as
libxml2? 
_______________________________________________
xml mailing list, project page  http://xmlsoft.org/
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml

Reply via email to