[Bug 480724] Review Request: djbdns - A Domain Name System by D. J. Bernstein

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724





--- Comment #24 from Mark Johnson <johnsonm@xxxxxxxxx>  2009-03-06 12:11:55 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> This is generally how the GPL works.
> 
> If you take file A, which is under Public Domain (all rights granted to 
> everyone) and file B, which is under some version of the GPL, and you compile
> them together to generate binary C, binary C is under the terms of the GPL,
> because the GPL is by far the more restrictive license, and the terms of file 
> A are all being met by it.

I didn't ask about a hypothetical binary C.  To use your terminology for this
thought experiment, do the terms of the GPL apply to file A, if file A and only
file A, is obtained from pjp's djbdns-1.05.1.tar.gz, which includes a copy of
v3 of the GPL?

> No, but I'm pretty sure the latest release for all of his code drops took out
> the copyright statement. He has also issued blanket 

To my knowledge, the last release of djbdns was 8 years ago and he did not
issue a new release when he abandoned his copyright.  The tarball at:

http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/djbdns-1.05.tar.gz

still contains this in the README:

djbdns 1.05
20010211
Copyright 2001
D. J. Bernstein

> Thus, there is no need to retain his copyright statement, as it clearly no
> longer applies. To re-add it would be incorrect and misleading.

I did not say his copyright statement should be retained.  I'm just trying to
say that when it is removed (as it already has been), his declaration at 

http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html

should be referenced explicitly.  

> Given that he has abandoned copyright entirely, he no longer has any say in
> what anyone does with it.

No, but it's no excuse to get sloppy and give people the wrong idea, either. 
I've got my own public domain fork of djbdns and I would very much appreciate
it if pjp was very clear that the original material he based his fork on was
public domain.

In any event, we're seriously cluttering this bug/ticket up.  Suggest we take
any further discussions elsewhere or just table them.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]