Re: New licence for cryto++ code-base
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Sam TH wrote:
> I think it's exceedingly unreasonable to declare software as non-free
> since the license specifies compliance with the law at that time (this
> was written 5 years ago).
I think this is a mute point. Free is free, non-free is non-free and laws
do not change anything about that.
> I think this clause is clearly meant to
> instruct people on the law relating to export from the US. And since
> Debian has no intention of exporting this from the US (that's what
> pandora is for), I don't think this should matter.
Do I understand the licence wrong, or does it not only talk about
exporting but about giving to whomever not in the US, without looking on
where you are?
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
Reply to: