On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 09:09:03AM -0400, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> > On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 12:32:04PM -0400, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> >> Why not? A license like the GPL, but with a clause requiring that Foo
> >> Inc. have the right to relicense any derivative works as they please
> >> is DFSG free?
> > DFSG-free means that it can be included in Debian, maintained by our
> > maintainers and used by our users.
> Now you're being silly. Surely you're not proposing that as an
> adequate reformulation of the DFSG?
It's the primary reason why the DFSG exists.
> Are you saying restrictions on modification are OK so long as they
> don't narrow the scope of possible modifications? I.e., the license
> can make you jump whatever hoops it likes before modifying,
No, because that would mean we couldn't maintain it.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations --
you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
Attachment:
pgp2OAJ0fE7yf.pgp
Description: PGP signature