On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 01:01:33PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > I am worried about this situation since the file POSIX-COPYRIGHT > > doesn't lose a word about re-distribution, modifications and > > permission to distribute changes, neither does the press release > > > > I'm worried in particular since if the license does not conform with > > the Open Source Definition aka Debian Free Software Guidelines, which > > I fear, it would render the entire manpages package non-free. What a > > wonderful contribution to the Free Software community... > > > > Any ideas and suggestions are welcome > > Modification is expressly prohibited by both groups, so unless there's > something we're not seeing, that's about as non-free as you can get. > > IEEE and The Open Group are in the business of publishing > specifications and charging for copies of them, and POSIX has never > historically been a free document. I'd treat any license from them > like a live grenade. I agree. I think this is a poison pill, and I have thought so since I first read the Slashdot story and conspicuously found no mention of license to do anything except permit one party to "use" the material. As far as I can tell: Non-free as hell. Avoid like the plague. -- G. Branden Robinson | Our ignorance is God; what we Debian GNU/Linux | know is science. branden@debian.org | -- Robert Green Ingersoll http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature