On 06/01/2010 12:26 PM, salsaman wrote: > Debian has an extremely capable legal team who have many years of > experience dealing with these matters. If something is cleared for > inclusion in debian, you can pretty much assume it is legally OK. I'm sorry. If you could only see how hard I am laughing right now. Needless to say, in this universe, I would not make that assumption. Legal issues surrounding FOSS are very complicated. I dare say that there are less than 100 people (possibly less than 50) who have a solid grasp on the complexities of the various concerns around copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, and patents with regards to FOSS, and none of those people are involved with debian-legal in any meaningful way, to the best of my knowledge. That's not saying that Debian Legal isn't a group of well-intentioned, generally intelligent folks, simply that they are by no means a good source for legal advice, issue resolution, or acceptability of licensing. I consult with lawyers, frequently. There is no evidence that the majority of debian legal participants do. Now, if you had said that someone like Van Lindberg, or the SFLC had cleared something from a legal perspective, that might be noteworthy, and would motivate me to revisit something. But Debian Legal? Armchair lawyering at its worst. ~spot -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
