--On Tuesday, October 03, 2006 3:54 PM -0700 Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com>
Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Tuesday, October 03, 2006 7:23 PM +0000 kurt(a)OpenLDAP.org wrote:
>> Update of /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/servers/slapd/schema
>> Modified Files:
>> core.schema 1.88 -> 1.89
>> Log Message:
>> Incorporate a bit of text from RFC 4524, just to make a point regarding
> The general problem is that things that are copyrightable are not
> generally distributable in free distributions (i.e., debian), which
> means that they then cannot distribute core.schema with the OpenLDAP
> distribution if you make the copyright statement applicable. They
> already strip out the RFC's since they also are non-free.
I fail to see how any of this is the OpenLDAP Project's concern. The
Project provides a source code distribution, not runnable packages.
Whoever creates the runnable packages deals with packaging issues however
they see fit.
As a philosophical point - in the United States, every written work is
automatically covered by copyright at the moment of creation.
This is factually false. Recipes cannot be copyrighted, nor can interface
specifications, nor can telephone books, except to the degree that a
compilation copyright applies.
You'll note that practically every file in the OpenLDAP source
covered by one or more copyrights. To assert that things that are
copywritten cannot be distributed freely is a rather peculiar viewpoint;
The problem is the type of copywrite, not whether or not it is copywritten.
(i.e., able to be modified (free) or not (non-free)).
things can be distributed according to the License granted by the
Yes, and the license in this case is non-free, so it's good that the
material wasn't copyrightable in the first place.
Principal Software Developer
ITS/Shared Application Services
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html