Re: what about Pine's license?
On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> > [1] ftp://ftp.cac.washington.edu/pine/docs/legal.txt
>
> Redistribution of this release is permitted as follows, or by
> mutual agreement:
>
> (a) In free-of-charge or at-cost distributions by non-profit concerns;
This sounds like Debian and the ftp servers.
> (b) In free-of-charge distributions by for-profit concerns;
Pine doesn't want a company making money from Pine/Pico/Pilot...
> (c) Inclusion in a CD-ROM collection of free-of-charge, shareware, or
> non-proprietary software for which a fee may be charged for the
> packaged distribution.
... but it is ok to charge for a distribution if you are producing CD's.
> The above also makes it non-free.
? If Pine is non-free, then it is non-free.
Why does non-free == no modified binaries?
later,
Bruce
Reply to: