From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Debian: reiser4 non-DFSG-free. !?! Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 12:26:05 -0700 Message-ID: <409A914D.1020301@namesys.com> References: <409A90A5.30600@almg.gov.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <409A90A5.30600@almg.gov.br> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Humberto Massa Cc: debian-legal@lists.debian.org, reiserfs-list@namesys.com Another example: reiser@linux:~/reiser4progs-0.5.3> /sbin/mkreiserfs -V mkreiserfs 3.6.9 (2003 www.namesys.com) A pair of credits: Edward Shushkin wrote the encryption and compression file plugins, and the V3 journal relocation code. Vladimir Demidov wrote the parser for sys_reiser4(), the V3 alpha port, part of the V3 journal relocation code, and helped Hans keep the business side of things running. Humberto Massa wrote: > @ 06/05/2004 15:29 : wrote Hans Reiser : > >> I just modified the Reiser4 license to be the following: >> >> The Anti-Plagiarism License >> >> > etc. > > Mr. Heiser, > > I am a software developer, a paralegal, and a Debian user. Recently, > I've participated in various technical discussions in debian-devel and > in various licensing discussions in -legal. While I have sent you, > both by way of the lists and personally, some questions about the > reasoning of your licenses, you have up to the present moment > refrained to answer me. > > I stated in those e-mails that I am a great admirer of your work. I > stated, also, that I agree with your concerns about plagiarism. I > said, moreover, that I think that your work and the other reiser[34] > contributors' work is important. Important to Debian. Important to the > Linux community. Important to the Linux users. It's certainly > important to me. > > What I don't understand is _why_ are you doing this in such a > beligerant manner. I repeat: please, let's work our differences out. > Let us reach consensus and move forward. > > Reading all the lists archives and bug reports, it appears to me that > (at least part of) the problem is the following: some of your > filesystem utilities displayed, unconditionally, a big (by some > measure, but greater than 3 lines) attribution of credits. This was > too much to some package maintainers, and they transferred said text > to a file in the documentation directory for the package. You filed a > bug, the maintainer gave you the shoulder, flames ensued, etc. > > I don't agree with you that this is plagiarism. I'm sorry to say, but, > in my dictionary (and in the jurisdiction I live in) plagiarism would > be, for instance, remove *all* the credit attributions in the > packages, or substituting them for some credits crediting the wrong > person or persons. In this case, here in Brasil at least, the person > commiting such acts would be subject to one to four years in jail and > a fine. > > The legal part of this remembers me of another problem, with your old > "clarifications" over the GPL and with your new Anti-Plagiarism > License: it's a GPL-incompatible license ... for a work (reiser4) > which is derived from a GPL'd work (linux). > > This pretty much renders your product (reiser4) undistributable by any > person other than yourself. And, in principle, even by yourself. And I > think this is a very big loss. > > About the credits: if the credits attribution is too long to fit by > the standards of the package's maintainer (who is the proper authority > in the case, seemingly), what other solution there is? Just putting a > line like: > > "Many people contributed to this project. Please look: > /usr/share/doc/reiserfsprogs/CREDITS." > > is not enough? I mean, instead of the 20+ lines of the current display > in dispute? As someone noticed in debian-legal, many people leave the > theather before the credits roll. They know it's a (for instance) > George Lucas' movie, but they won't know the name of the cameramen. > Isn't it the same thing? If you want to see the credits, go and see > them. It's not like Debian did make them disappear. > > Now, I have only one question: is there a way you could back out in > your opinion and return to the old licensing for your products, > provided a consensus on moment and size of the credits attribution is > reached? If the answer is yes, I volunteer to mediate the discussions > between you and the affected package(s) maintainer(s). > Try running mkreiserfs and seeing if it really is all that bad, ok? Thanks for caring. Hans