Re: Fwd: reiser4 non-free?
Russ Allbery <email@example.com> writes:
> The GPL is actually a rather interesting case here, since it *does*
> require the preservation of credits, and in a way that I believe
> Debian finds acceptably free.
2c of the GPL is actually somewhat controversial. I don't know whether
anyone actually thinks it makes the license non-free, but I suspect a
number of people would be quite happy if it were removed from the GPL.
That said, it's much weaker than the proposed "clarification" for
- As you point out, it's only for interactive use. While not (directly)
a freeness issue, that does significantly reduce the burden; since
it's being used interactively you've ruled out a lot of the more
irritating times to display a verbose message.
- It defines what must be presented clearly (i.e., copyright, no
warranty, where to find the GPL), but in the loosest possible terms
("display an announcement including" the information, rather than
- The stuff being displayed serves a clear legal purpose and cannot be
expanded/added to by downstream modifications. For example, two works
which both display such a blurb, when combined, need only display one
such blurb, rather than the combination of two different blurbs.
Personally, I consider this to be about the outside limit wrt freedom.
Jeremy Hankins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03