Re: [PROPOSED] Change package relations policy to remove references to non-free from main
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.1.1.0
Severity: normal
Joseph Carter wrote:
>I think the keyring belongs in non-US/main, but it can't get there until
>20 September 2000 unless we change our policy to not consider US patents
>as making something automatically non-free.
I did not realise that was the policy, but I see this in 2.1.4:
`Non-free' contains packages which are not compliant with the DFSG or
which are encumbered by patents or other legal issues that make their
distribution problematic.
Patents are almost entirely a US problem; `other legal issues' is very
vague, but if it makes distribution a problem, the package should probably
not be in the archive at all.
All packages in `non-free' must be electronically distributable across
international borders.
Would a patent lawyer agree that software that violated US patents is freely
transferable into USA? Has anyone taken any advice on this?
In any case, I think it is wrong for US problems to dictate what is free or
not.
<PROPOSAL>
This is a formal proposal to change policy to read thus:
============================================================================
2.1.4. The non-free section
---------------------------
`Non-free' contains packages which are not compliant with the DFSG.
There must be no legal issues that hinder the packages' being freely
distributable from the archive. Non-free packages may have restrictions
on their being included in a distribution for sale; checking such
restrictions is the responsibility of the person making the
distribution.
All packages in `non-free' must be electronically distributable across
international borders.
2.1.5. The non-us server
------------------------
Some programs with cryptographic program code must be stored on the
"non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
This applies only to packages which contain cryptographic code. A
package containing a program with an interface to a cryptographic
program or a program that's dynamically linked against a cryptographic
library can be distributed if it is capable of running without the
cryptography library or program.
Packages that violate US patents must also be placed on the non-us server.
============================================================================
</PROPOSAL>
This leaves open the problem of what to do about packages that violate
patents of other countries; since they are currently in non-free, our
mirrors host them anyway.
We should probably maintain a database of legal issues against packages, to
make it easy for people to see if there is anything they should exclude from
mirrors.
--
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
========================================
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
========================================
"Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods? who is
like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises,
doing wonders?" Exodus 15:11
Reply to: