Re: [gNewSense-users] package adopted: Language-pack-ti-Language-pack-yi

[Markus Laire]

Leo Arias F. wrote:
> 2007/11/5, Markus Laire <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>:
>
>
>     IMO this seems to be a bug in the copyright-file.
>
>     Because of such bugs, I don't trust Debian's copyright-files too much.
>     To be more sure about actual licensing terms, one should check each
>     source-file and not just the copyright-file. (I have a dream of doing a
>     program for this task, but it might take years before I have time to do
>     it, if ever.)
>
>
> I agree with you. I started checking every source file, and I found a 
> lot of headers like this.
>
> # <language> translation for <program>
> # Copyright (C) <year>
> # <copyright holder> <email>
>
> It doesn't say anything about copyleft, or gpl license, but the 
> /debian/copyright file says the package is GPLed.
>
> For example, on xsane.po for Chinese:
> # chines translation for xsane
> # Copyright (C) 2004
> # leolarrel <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>
>
> So I wrote to leolarrel asking about this file, and he said:
> "this translation po file for xsane is GPL . I just copy main po file 
> and apply
> chinese translation . so I forget to check this line "# Copyright (C) 
> 2004" "
>
> Now, shall we assume that all the files with that kind of header are 
> licensed under GPL, as the file in the debian folder says?, or do we 
> have to send an email to the copyright holders in all cases?

Usually there is a package-wide license somewhere which IMO applies to 
such files which don't have any explicit license. Often that is found in 
a file called LICENSE or README or something like, outside the 
Debian-folder.

The Debian-folder is often added by the Debian Developers and not by the 
copyright-holders, and so I prefer to refer to files outside of the 
Debian-folder when possible.

--
Markus Laire