tex live status

Sebastian Rahtz tex-live@tug.org
Sun, 28 Mar 1999 23:00:26 +0100 (BST)

karl@tug.org writes:

 > For the copyright, I see no alternative at this point to simply
 > disallowing for-profit copying, does anyone disagree?  I believe
no, i think thats true

 > not-for-profit copying is ok, isn't it?  Are there any known problems
 > besides the packages with no copyright notice at all?  (They make it
 > technically illegal, but we never worried about them in previous years
 > so I don't propose to start now.)

 >     Some of the software requires that, if it is packaged with other
 >     publications, like books or journals, those things be freely
 >     copyable.
 > What software is this?  This seems extremely dubious, legally.  In GPL
 > terms, it's `mere aggregation'.
Deutsch required that....

 > I think the copyright file should be named LICENSE or maybe LICENSE.TL4.
you can call it whatever you like :-}

 > Sebastian, for TeX Live as a whole, do you wish to forbid people
 > from making a tar file of the CD image and putting it up for ftp?
 > Or put any other conditions in it?
tricky. I would prefer that they did not do so, primarily because
they may then change bits of it, but leave our name on it. I fear
corrupt or partial copies floating around.

or do you mean an actual ISO image? in that case, if someone grabbed
it and made CDs for sale, what could we do to stop them? legally,
its OK, but morally perhaps not? i dont know

 > - I'm not sure if we should mention the catalogue?
please do. i really really want to stress that people should look at

 > - Sebastian, I don't know if you want your name on this :).
i want more sleep...

 > - (the biggie) I don't know if it's really allowed to charge a nominal
 >   fee for redistribution of the CD.  (In fact, I don't think it is,
 >   technically.)  But since we've done it for three years without any
 >   repercussions, let's do it again.
indeed. legally, we stink. morally, we survive, since our profits 
dont go to anyones pocket

 > respective software packages.  To learn these requirements, you must
 > read the conditions for each individual package you wish to copy,
 > modify, or redistribute.  In general, there is no other way.  Sorry.
no, say they should check the Catalogue first.

i like the simplicity and directness of your wording