On 19/03/10 at 18:16 +0900, Brian Candler wrote:
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
> > Lawyers will agree that there's a distribution incompatibility since
> > the GNU GPL doesn't permit attribution requirements and OpenSSL
> > requires it under two different licences.
> 
> If Debian are worried about infringement, then who do they think is 
> going to sue them?
> 
> (1) The OpenSSL copyright holders?

[..]

> (2) The Ruby/FreeRADIUS/etc people?

[..]

You shouldn't assume that because someone is very friendly now, it will
always be the case. There has been several occurrences of people or
groups changing their mind, because, for a example, a company was bought
by another one with a less friendly position.

Note that Freeradius has a exception for OpenSSL in src/LICENSE.openssl.
Ruby doesn't AFAICS.

> They might be worried if someone tried to redistribute Ruby+OpenSSL 
> under a single combined licence which was more restrictive than the GPL. 
> But Debian isn't doing that; they aggregate a whole load of software, 
> each distributed under its own licence. Is there an all-encompassing 
> "Debian Licence"? I didn't think so, and I wouldn't use Debian/Ubuntu if 
> I discovered there were.

There isn't.
-- 
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas / lucas-nussbaum.net   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas / nussbaum.fr             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |