On Tue, 17 Feb 2004, David Nusinow wrote: > If there could be some sort of determination of whether or not this > license is DFSG compliant, we can push ahead and potentially use it. This license is basically equivalent to the 4 clause BSD license, and as such is generally[1] considered to be DFSG Free. However, before using it in Debian's XFree86 packages[2] I strongly suggest working with the copyright holder to remove the advertising clause. With a few notable (and sometimes annoyingly comical) exceptions, almost everyone whose licenses started with the advertising clause has since removed it, as they recognize how pointless they rapidly become. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html if you need more concrete reasons. Feel free to involve me and/or other -legal denizens if upstream needs more convincing, assuming this code is something that would be benificial to Debian. Don Armstrong 1: There are some (including myself) who are on the fence on this issue, and would like nothing better than to see works with these abnoxious advertising clauses go away. 2: Considering the bruhaha over the XFree86 1.1 license, I doubt Branden will welcome such code in xfree86. -- Guns Don't Kill People. *I* Kill People. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature