Re: PPA TOS and license requirements

["Joey Stanford" <joey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Good points.  I'll take this one on.

On 9/19/07, Jordan Mantha <mantha@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> HI all,
>
> We really need clarify and nail down the "acceptable licenses" part of
> the PPA TOS and PPAQuickStart page. Right now the TOS has:
>
> "You understand and agree that any content you upload to PPAs must be
> freely redistributable by Canonical, and licensed under any OSI
> approved license. http://opensource.org/licenses/category";
>
> The PPAQuickStart page has:
>
> "An APT repository of up to 1 gigabyte for material licensed with an
> [WWW] OSI-approved licence."
>
> and further down in the FAQ
>
> "Please do not publish packages in your PPA which are not
> redistributable (the basic requirement for packages in Ubuntu)."
>
> Now, since the TOS is authoritative then the FAQ part of PPAQuickStart
> is not correct.
>
> Overall though, IMO, both statements ("OSI approved" and
> "redistributable") are two extremes and neither are what is intended.
> The point was that the software should be Free/Libre/Open Source
> Software, unless I'm mistaken. The OSI approved license list doesn't
> include important licenses such as Creative Commons that *are* used in
> Ubuntu. The "redistributable" requirement says nothing towards
> Freeness. This could include redistributable closed-source
> applications such as you might find in the Multiverse repository.
>
> So, it's very important to have a clear and consistent license policy
> for PPAs. I'm pretty sure quite a few people have already violated the
> TOS based on the "redistributable" statement.
>
> -Jordan.
>
> --
> launchpad-users mailing list
> launchpad-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
>



-- 
Office: +1-303-800-6609, Skype: happyhacking, IRC: Rinchen