Debian bug report logs - #1672
non-free packages

Message received at debian-bugs:

From cus.cam.ac.uk!iwj10 Sun Oct 15 03:48:17 1995
Return-Path: <iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t4Qc4-000ETNC; Sun, 15 Oct 95 03:48 PDT
Received: from bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk by pixar.com with SMTP id AA21667
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Sun, 15 Oct 1995 03:47:51 -0700
Received: by bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk 
	(Smail-3.1.29.0 #36) id m0t4Qby-000BzhC; Sun, 15 Oct 95 11:48 BST
Received: by chiark
	id <m0t49iE-0002aBZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
	(Debian /\oo/\ Smail3.1.29.1 #29.33); Sat, 14 Oct 95 17:45 BST
Message-Id: <m0t49iE-0002aBZ@chiark.al.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 95 17:45 BST
From: Ian Jackson <iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk>
To: debian-bugs@pixar.com
Subject: Re: Bug#1672: non-free packages
References: <199510131537.QAA02193@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>

Bruce Perens writes ("Bug#1672: non-free packages"):
> marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl said:
> > auto-pgp is under the GPL, and doesn't do any encryption by itself
> > (so it's not munitions :-), what's the problem?
> 
> Its author asked for it to be placed in non-free.

This is somewhat misleading.

The dpkg maintainer asked for it to be placed in non-free.  As it
happens the dpkg maintainer and the author of auto-pgp are the same
person, me :-), but the reason I asked for it to be moved is not
because I don't want it in Debian (I do), but because it depends on
PGP, which has to go in non-free.

In general, putting X in a higher priority level than Y when X depends
on Y is a bad thing from the point of view of dselect's dependency
management.

It can go back into the main distribution when I get around to
producing a Debian version of PGP 2.3a which has enough of the bugs
fixed to be suitable for use.

Ian.

Message received at debian-bugs:

From pixar.com!bruce Fri Oct 13 16:37:31 1995
Return-Path: <bruce@pixar.com>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t3tfO-000DIgC; Fri, 13 Oct 95 16:37 PDT
Received: from mongo.pixar.com by pixar.com with SMTP id AA13174
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for bruce@mongo.pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:07 -0700
Received: by mongo.pixar.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #15)
	id m0t3tev-000DgCC; Fri, 13 Oct 95 16:37 PDT
Message-Id: <m0t3tev-000DgCC@mongo.pixar.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.2 7/18/95
To: Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Cc: bruce@Pixar.com (Bruce Perens), debian-bugs@Pixar.com
Subject: Re: Bug#1672: non-free packages 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 13 Oct 1995 21:38:58 PDT."
             <199510132039.VAA03751@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:01 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@Pixar.com>

OK - giftrans and pbmplus are in non-free because of the Unisys compression
patent. They infringe on the patent. I'd want a written license from Unisys
before including these on a CD. This is a good reason to support FSF & LPF
in their efforts against software patents.

Regarding ZIP and UNZIP "You can charge for the cost of the media
(CDROM, diskettes, etc.) and a small copying fee." is sufficient reason to
keep them in non-free. No CD-ROM that I know of is sold for media cost and
a copying fee - they are explicitly sold for profit. The CD manufacturers
are free to include stuff from non-free if they want the liability. I don't
want them to put non-free software on their discs through ignorance, thus
we put it in a special directory.

In the case of Seyon, we should get an individual license of the type I got
Steven van den Berg to agree to for Procmail:

The copyright statement below is addended for the Debian system:
       This program may be sold as a component of the Debian Linux
       distribution or a Linux distribution derived from the Debian
       Linux distribution. If it is distributed in binary form, the
       source code must be included in the distribution as well.
End of addendum.

In the case of xv and ncftp, we should get a license addendum like the one
above.

If the reason for keeping a package out of the main distribution is the 
copyright, and not a desire to keep it unsupported, that package belongs in
non-free, not contrib. The guidelines, unfortunately, are out of date.

I want to make it very clear that "everyone else was doing it, so I did it too"
would not work as a defense in U.S. civil court. I could lose all of my 
savings,
stock in my employer's company, and property if I get sued over this issue.
Thus, I'm going to try to err on the side of caution on copyright and patent
issues.

	Thanks

	Bruce


--
-- Attention Radio Amateurs: For information on "Linux for Hams",
-- read the WWW page http://www.hams.com/LinuxForHams, 
-- or e-mail the word "help" to info@hams.com

Message received at debian-bugs:

From enws428.EAS.ASU.EDU!deisher Fri Oct 13 16:20:53 1995
Return-Path: <deisher@enws428.EAS.ASU.EDU>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t3tPI-000DJ0C; Fri, 13 Oct 95 16:20 PDT
Received: from asuvax.EAS.ASU.EDU by pixar.com with SMTP id AA12490
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:20:28 -0700
Received: from ganges (enws428.EAS.ASU.EDU) by asuvax.eas.asu.edu with SMTP id AA12476
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for debian-bugs@pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:17:56 -0700
Received: by ganges (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA03469; Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:20:03 -0700
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:20:03 -0700
Message-Id: <9510132320.AA03469@ganges>
From: Michael E. Deisher <deisher@enws428.EAS.ASU.EDU>
To: marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl, debian-bugs@pixar.com
In-Reply-To: <199510131537.QAA02193@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl> (message from
	Marek Michalkiewicz on Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:10 +0100 (MET))
Subject: Re: Bug#1672: non-free packages

On Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:10 +0100 (MET), Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl> said:

> auto-pgp is under the GPL, and doesn't do any encryption by itself
> (so it's not munitions :-), what's the problem?

The author (Ian Jackson) felt that it would confuse people to have a
package in the Debian Linux distribution that depends on another
package (pgp) that is non-free.  As the package maintainer, I was
disappointed with this decision.  However, it makes some sense.
This way people who buy CDs (and don't have ftp access) aren't getting
packages they can't use.

--Mike

Message received at debian-bugs:

From simons-rock.edu!jimr Fri Oct 13 14:16:31 1995
Return-Path: <jimr@simons-rock.edu>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t3rSw-000E3AC; Fri, 13 Oct 95 14:16 PDT
Received: from plato.simons-rock.edu by pixar.com with SMTP id AA03341
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 14:15:56 -0700
Received: from simons-rock.edu by plato.simons-rock.edu with smtp
	(Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0t3qkX-0003LRC; Fri, 13 Oct 95 16:30 EDT
Message-Id: <m0t3qkX-0003LRC@plato.simons-rock.edu>
To: Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>,
        debian-bugs@pixar.com
Subject: Re: Bug#1672: non-free packages 
In-Reply-To: Message from Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl> 
   of "Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:10 BST." <199510131537.QAA02193@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl> 
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:30:37 -0400
From: "James A. Robinson" <jimr@simons-rock.edu>


> giftrans, pbmplus - I have read the copyrights and really can't see
> what's the problem, could someone explain it to me?

I maintain pbmplus, the problem is that, while the author's copyright
says it is free for distribution, some people are worried about the
"recent" Compuserve problem with the GIF format.  I've sent mail to
the author, and he doesn't respond, so for now it is stuck in
non-free.

> If no one has the time to ask the authors - just tell me, I will
> try to do it for you.

If you can track the pbmplus author down to a place where he answers
his mail, go for it! :)


Jim

Message received at debian-bugs:

From i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl!marekm Fri Oct 13 13:39:19 1995
Return-Path: <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t3qsw-000E0QC; Fri, 13 Oct 95 13:39 PDT
Received: from i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl by pixar.com with SMTP id AA00642
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for bruce@mongo.pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 13:38:44 -0700
Received: (from marekm@localhost) by i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl (8.6.12/8.6.9) id VAA03751; Fri, 13 Oct 1995 21:39:01 +0100
From: Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Message-Id: <199510132039.VAA03751@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Subject: Re: Bug#1672: non-free packages
To: bruce@Pixar.com (Bruce Perens)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 21:38:58 +0100 (MET)
Cc: debian-bugs@Pixar.com, bruce@Pixar.com
In-Reply-To: <m0t3q48-000Dl1C@mongo.pixar.com> from "Bruce Perens" at Oct 13, 95 12:46:48 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 6655      

Bruce Perens:
> > giftrans, pbmplus - I have read the copyrights and really can't see 
> > what's the problem, could someone explain it to me?
> 
> I haven't read it. Please share it with us.
> Does it say anything like "may not be sold"?

No.  From giftrans.c:
/*
** GIFtrans v1.12
**
** Convert any GIF file into a GIF89a
** Allows for setting the transparent or background color, changing colors,
** adding or removing comments. Also code to analyze GIF contents.
**
** Copyright (c) 24.2.94 by Andreas Ley <ley@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>
**
** Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any
** purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
** copyright notice appears in all copies. This software is provided "as is"
** and without any express or implied warranties.
[,,,]
*/


>From pbmplus debian.COPYRIGHT:
Jef Poskanzer's COPYRIGHT for PBMPLUS

All the software in this package, whether by me or by a contributer,
has a copyright similar to this one:

    Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
    documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided
    that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that
    copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting
    documentation.  This software is provided "as is" without express or
    implied warranty.

Many people get confused by this legalese, especially the part about
"without fee".  Does this mean you can't charge for any product that
uses PBMPLUS?  No.  All it means is that you don't have to pay me.
You can do what you want with this software.  Build it into your
package, steal code from it, whatever.  Just be sure to let people
know where it came from.


As you can see, the author even explains the confusing "without fee"
thing, same as in giftrans.

> > seyon - OK, may not be modified, but I don't think merely adding 
> > debian.* files counts as modification (this doesn't affect the 
> > binary; maybe distribute original source+diff instead of modified 
> > source+diff to get around this problem).
> 
> I'd prefer to err on the cautious side here. We can't afford to be sued,
> and neither can our CD-ROM vendors. I'd prefer not to lose my home and assets.

>From seyon debian.README:
======================================================================

  Seyon is Copyright (c) 1992 of Muhammad M. Saggaf. Seyon is not
  public domain. Permission is granted to use and distribute Seyon
  freely for any use and to sell it at any price without reference to
  the copyright owner provided that in all above cases Seyon is intact
  and is not made part of any program either in whole or in part and
  that this copyright notice is included with Seyon. Permission is
  also granted to modify the source as long as the modified source is
  not distributed.

======================================================================


So if you are so careful AND adding debian.* files counts as modification,
distribution on ftp sites violates the copyright anyway...  (unless you
distribute original+diff instead of modified+diff).

> > unzip, zip - what's the problem?  They are distributed on SimTel 
> > (M$-DO$) CD-ROMs, and you can't even upload anything to SimTel ftp 
> > sites that is not freely distributable on CD-ROMs.  These programs 
> > are also distributed with Slackware.  If in doubt, ask the authors, I 
> > don't think they will object.
> 
> Again, we are more careful, or they have individual permission.
> I haven't seen the copyright statements, please share them with us.

>From the unzip/zip FAQ at the end of the COPYING file:

   Q. Can I distribute Zip and UnZip sources and/or executables?

   A. You may redistribute the latest official distributions without
      any modification, and without even asking us for permission.
      [Note that an "executable distribution" includes documentation,
      even if it's in a separate zipfile; plain executables do NOT
      count.]  You can charge for the cost of the media (CDROM, disk-
      ettes, etc.) and a small copying fee.  Distributed archives
      should follow the naming conventions used in the Where file.
      If you want to distribute modified versions please contact us
      at zip-bugs@wkuvx1.wku.edu first.  You must not distribute beta
      versions without explicit permission to do so.

Again I don't think adding Debian's packaging scheme counts as modification
as long as compiled executables are exactly the same.  Since there are
restrictions on modification but CD-ROM distribution is OK, contrib seems
like a good place.  Like Seyon, if Debian packaging counts as modification
then even ftp distribution of modified versions is not allowed...  (again,
distribute original+diff instead of modified+diff if this is the problem)

> Please correspond with the package maintainers, and if they don't object
> please contact the authors for a copyright statement we can live with.

OK, I will do so unless the maintainers respond faster (I will be off the
net for a few days).

> > xv, ncftp - can't be distributed without permission, but are part of 
> > Slackware (with permission as far as I know), so I suggest to contact 
> > the authors, it is likely that they will allow distribution as part 
> > of Debian.  Especially xv is a nice package - it's shareware but not 
> > many shareware programs come with source...
> 
> If it's shareware, it belongs in non-free.

... or in contrib.  From the Guidelines document:

Ensure that distribution is possible in binary and source form without
restrictions on modification, redistribution and for-profit use of the
package.  All submissions to be included in the distribution proper
_must_ be free of such restrictions or they cannot be included.

Submissions for `contrib' availability, however, may be allowed to
deviate from this requirement; we want the maximum amount of software
to be available in `dpkg' format for Debian users, so in certain
circumstances it will be allowable to have ``shareware'' and other
non-free software optionally available as `contrib' packages.  It is
important to note that these packages will be _optional_ additions to
the Debian system and that the Debian system itself will remain
completely free of such packages.


> CD-ROM publishers must
> get individual permission from the authors of these programs to distribute
> them.

I don't know.  Maybe just Slackware in general has permission from the
authors, and everyone can distribute Slackware on CD-ROMs?  Slackware
is careful, too, they have a "non-commercial-use" directory (Kermit,
Mosaic).

Regards,

Marek

Message received at debian-bugs:

From pixar.com!bruce Fri Oct 13 12:47:12 1995
Return-Path: <bruce@pixar.com>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t3q4V-000Dl1C; Fri, 13 Oct 95 12:47 PDT
Received: from mongo.pixar.com by pixar.com with SMTP id AA27068
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 12:46:49 -0700
Received: by mongo.pixar.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #15)
	id m0t3q48-000Dl1C; Fri, 13 Oct 95 12:46 PDT
Message-Id: <m0t3q48-000Dl1C@mongo.pixar.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.2 7/18/95
To: Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>,
        debian-bugs@Pixar.com
Cc: bruce@Pixar.com
Subject: Re: Bug#1672: non-free packages 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:10 PDT."
             <199510131537.QAA02193@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 12:46:48 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@Pixar.com>


marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl said:
> auto-pgp is under the GPL, and doesn't do any encryption by itself 
> (so it's not munitions :-), what's the problem?

Its author asked for it to be placed in non-free.

> giftrans, pbmplus - I have read the copyrights and really can't see 
> what's the problem, could someone explain it to me?

I haven't read it. Please share it with us.
Does it say anything like "may not be sold"?

> seyon - OK, may not be modified, but I don't think merely adding 
> debian.* files counts as modification (this doesn't affect the 
> binary; maybe distribute original source+diff instead of modified 
> source+diff to get around this problem).

I'd prefer to err on the cautious side here. We can't afford to be sued,
and neither can our CD-ROM vendors. I'd prefer not to lose my home and assets.

> Seyon is distributed with Slackware.

We are more careful than slackware, or they have individual permission.

> unzip, zip - what's the problem?  They are distributed on SimTel 
> (M$-DO$) CD-ROMs, and you can't even upload anything to SimTel ftp 
> sites that is not freely distributable on CD-ROMs.  These programs 
> are also distributed with Slackware.  If in doubt, ask the authors, I 
> don't think they will object.

Again, we are more careful, or they have individual permission.
I haven't seen the copyright statements, please share them with us.
Please correspond with the package maintainers, and if they don't object
please contact the authors for a copyright statement we can live with.
The copyright statement must allow the program to be sold - otherwise we can't
get the software on a Debian CD-ROM, and its proper place is in non-free so
that the CD-ROM publishers will not put it on their discs.

> xv, ncftp - can't be distributed without permission, but are part of 
> Slackware (with permission as far as I know), so I suggest to contact 
> the authors, it is likely that they will allow distribution as part 
> of Debian.  Especially xv is a nice package - it's shareware but not 
> many shareware programs come with source...

If it's shareware, it belongs in non-free. CD-ROM publishers must
get individual permission from the authors of these programs to distribute
them.

	Thanks

	Bruce



--
-- Attention Radio Amateurs: For information on "Linux for Hams",
-- read the WWW page http://www.hams.com/LinuxForHams, 
-- or e-mail the word "help" to info@hams.com

Message received at debian-bugs:

From i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl!marekm Fri Oct 13 08:37:28 1995
Return-Path: <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Received: from pixar.com by mongo.pixar.com with smtp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0t3mAp-000BF0C; Fri, 13 Oct 95 08:37 PDT
Received: from i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl by pixar.com with SMTP id AA08410
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for debian-bugs-pipe@mongo.pixar.com); Fri, 13 Oct 1995 08:36:58 -0700
Received: (from marekm@localhost) by i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl (8.6.12/8.6.9) id QAA02193 for debian-bugs@pixar.com; Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:15 +0100
From: Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Message-Id: <199510131537.QAA02193@i17linuxb.ists.pwr.wroc.pl>
Subject: non-free packages
To: debian-bugs@pixar.com
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:37:10 +0100 (MET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1600      

Package: auto-pgp, giftrans, pbmplus, seyon, unzip, zip, xv, ncftp

I think some non-free packages are really free, and it would be nice
to ask authors if there is any doubt.

auto-pgp is under the GPL, and doesn't do any encryption by itself
(so it's not munitions :-), what's the problem?

giftrans, pbmplus - I have read the copyrights and really can't see
what's the problem, could someone explain it to me?

seyon - OK, may not be modified, but I don't think merely adding
debian.* files counts as modification (this doesn't affect the
binary; maybe distribute original source+diff instead of modified
source+diff to get around this problem).  Seyon is distributed
with Slackware.

unzip, zip - what's the problem?  They are distributed on SimTel
(M$-DO$) CD-ROMs, and you can't even upload anything to SimTel
ftp sites that is not freely distributable on CD-ROMs.  These
programs are also distributed with Slackware.  If in doubt, ask
the authors, I don't think they will object.

xv, ncftp - can't be distributed without permission, but are part
of Slackware (with permission as far as I know), so I suggest to
contact the authors, it is likely that they will allow distribution
as part of Debian.  Especially xv is a nice package - it's shareware
but not many shareware programs come with source...

If I understand the Guidelines document, the above packages could
at least go in the "contrib" directory.  They are optional, and
they have some restrictions, but CD-ROM distribution should be OK.

If no one has the time to ask the authors - just tell me, I will
try to do it for you.

Marek