| Frank Küster 2005-11-30, 5:56 pm |
| "Kevin B. McCarty" <kmccarty@Princeton.EDU> wrote:
> Norbert Preining wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I figured that the LPPL could probably squeak by debian-legal
> (otherwise I wouldn't have ITP'ed XyMTeX), but I was more concerned
> about the somewhat contradictory-seeming reply from upstream. Possibly
> he has misinterpreted the meaning of the LPPL? But when there is a
> conflict between the written license in the package and the author's
> expressly stated wishes, it seems safest to assume that the latter are
> valid.
I'm not sure, but it seems to me as if the lppl allows derived works to
be licensed more restrictively, even with proprietary, no-sell, or
similar licenses. Therefore, it might be that it is not a
misinterpretation of the LPPL by XymTeX's author, but instead a
deliberate decision.
>
> I attach our entire email exchange (with some extraneous headers
> removed). I emailed once, to which he didn't reply; sent a follow-up
> email about a week later; and he finally gave the brief reply I quoted
> earlier. Apologies for the top-quoting in this exchange.
>
> I wasn't quite sure what to make of his reply so I didn't follow up
> further. Probably TeX Live or someone else distributing XyMTeX should
> do so, though.
Indeed; perhaps telling him that the Software will be taken off TeXLive
and moved to the new nonfree branch on CTAN will make him rethink his
decision.=20
Norbert, Karl for sure has more of a name than you and I - do you think
he has time to contact him?
Regards, Frank
--=20
Frank K=FCster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Z=FCrich
Debian Developer
|