Ticket #564 (closed defect: fixed)
clean up licensing
|Reported by:||geofft||Owned by:||jdreed|
|Cc:||Fixed in version:|
- There are (at least) two versions of the MIT license in use in our packages: one along the lines of <mit-copyright.h>/<mit-sipb-copyright.h>, and one the X11/Expat license, which is what the world at large considers the MIT license. We should standardize on one, probably the latter, because in my reading the former ("Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted...") implies that you can't make derivatives or sell them.
- The names of people who own copyrights are often wrong. For instance, Tim Abbott and Anders Kaseorg are listed as owning the copyrights for debathena-printing-config's packaging, but they haven't ever committed to that package.
- Binary packages that use DEB_TRANSFORM_FILES and therefore include modified versions of upstream files, and potentially all configuration packages, need to be licensed the same as the upstream package they configure, as derivative works.
For the record, the fact that sometimes code is copyright individuals and sometimes copyright MIT is intentional -- things by paid (IS&T) staff are owned by MIT, but things by (SIPB) volunteers are owned by themselves. It's possible we should consider assigning the copyright for everything to MIT, but there hasn't yet been a compelling reason.
- Owner set to jdreed
- Status changed from new to accepted
- Milestone changed from The Distant Future to Fall 2011