Re: what about Pine's license?

[Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>]

On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Bruce Sass wrote:

> 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?
> 
Because modifiability, specificly the right to distribute modified
binaries, is a DFSG requirement.

Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_-   Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide"  _-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (850) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-