On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 09:31, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 09:03:33PM +0000, Jim Marhaus wrote: > > "Debian Legal summary of the X-Oz License" > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/02/msg00229.html > > Clause 4 of the license posted at the start of this thread is, with the > execption of whos names it protects, word-for-word identical. > > Am I missing something? Yes. Clause 3 is the GPL-incompatible non-free one. Clause 4 is standard boilerplate, found in many licenses (it's also superfluous, being written into copyright by default in US law). -- Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part