Re: what license is ?
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:11:42PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > I don't recall what makes advertising clauses DFSG-free. Unenforcability?
>
> It doesn't violate DFSG 9, because it's not making any claims on the
> other software. The advertising clause kicks in whether you distribute
> the software by itself, on a compilation CD, or whatever.
>
> Now, the advertising clause is GPL-incompatible, which is what I suspect
> you're thinking of with the "additional restriction" stuff. But lots of
> free licenses are GPL-incompatible.
Well, if it was enforcable, it'd be a restriction on distribution: #1. I
seem to recall people saying that this wasn't a problem since it's not
within the bounds of copyright, and unenforcable, and could be ignored for
determining DFSG-freeness. (I'm not sure that ignoring a license restriction
because it's theretically not enforcable is a good *general* rule, but it
seems reasonable enough here.)
But I havn't followed a full discussion on this, so I don't know for sure.
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: