From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: Calibre Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:35:44 -0500 Message-ID: <878ufw8bm7.fsf@netris.org> References: <20150215102044.GA15074@debian> <87lhjx871z.fsf@netris.org> <20150217203056.GB30365@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59411) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNpnx-0000Sy-5D for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:35:45 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNpns-0006U7-Ik for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:35:41 -0500 Received: from world.peace.net ([50.252.239.5]:54215) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNpns-0006Sz-FG for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:35:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150217203056.GB30365@debian> (Andreas Enge's message of "Tue, 17 Feb 2015 21:30:56 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Andreas Enge writes: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:02:00AM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote: >> The calibre source tarball contains non-free software. Debian >> distributes their own excerpted source tarball instead, with the >> src/unrar, src/calibre/ebooks/markdown, and resources/viewer/mathjax >> directories removed, as well as src/odf/thumbnail.py. > > Amazing, thanks for looking into it. How do you find out which files > debian drops? I downloaded Debian's 'dfsg' source tarball, and the upstream source tarball, and used 'diff' to find the diferences. > I suppose that a "dfsg" in the package name is a warning > sign? Yes, although in many cases it is because the GNU Free Documentation License doesn't comply with Debian's DFSG when invariant sections are used. > This is even more surprising as there is the file COPYRIGHT > in the distribution, which diligently lists the licenses of lots of > packages, except apparently for the non-free ones... Debian's copyright file only lists the licenses of what they included in their source package, so anything they removed is not included. >> (2) src/calibre/ebooks/markdown/serializers.py license includes the text: >> >> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >> # By obtaining, using, and/or copying this software and/or its >> # associated documentation, you agree that you have read, understood, >> # and will comply with the following terms and conditions: >> # >> # Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and >> # its associated documentation for any purpose and without fee is >> # hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice appears in >> # all copies, and that both that copyright notice and this permission >> # notice appear in supporting documentation, and that the name of >> # Secret Labs AB or the author not be used in advertising or publicity >> # pertaining to distribution of the software without specific, written >> # prior permission. >> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >> >> I'm not as confident that this one is a problem, partly because I >> guess it is probably unenforceable, but the first paragraph is >> attempting to put a restriction on use. They are saying that you're >> not even allowed to use this software unless you have "read, >> understood, and will comply with ...". > > I suppose that the first sentence merely states "the following license > is valid", so I do not think it is a real problem. One always needs to > comply with the license, no? No. Normally one only has to comply with the license if you do something that would violate copyright law, e.g. redistribution. Mark