Re: User's thoughts about LPPL
> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 19:18:02 -0500
> From: Chris Lawrence <email@example.com>
> I don't think anyone here has a problem with a license that says "If
> your LaTeX doesn't pass such and such a validation suite, you can't
> call it LaTeX, but you can do whatever else you want to do with it."
This requirement is possible for TeX -- but it reqiured a lot of Don
Knuth's time and effort. A similar requirement for LaTeX is impossible
because of the sheer bulk of the code.
Probably the story about Computer Modern Fonts would be
instructive. These fonts are distributed under the license described
before: you can change everything, BUT you must rename. One of TeX
distributions (NTex) used slightly modified CM fonts without changing
file name. This provoked a very sharp responcse form
Knuth. Unfortunately the modified fonts got their way in a couple of
Linux distributions (Slackware and Redhat, as far as I remember).
Nevertheless it turned out that CM fonts are NOT the best for
non-American typesetting. Since CM fonts are not going to change, a
new set called EC was created, based on Knuth's work. This was done
according to the license: the fonts are free, the names are
copyrighted. The current distributions include EC set, which is the
default for many installations.
Furious activity is no substitute for understanding.
-- H.H. Williams
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com