Re: flowc license

[Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote:

> If one day we find out an issue with one of the three mentioned licenses
> and that issue makes the license non-free, we will be in trouble: what
> could we do in such a case? Say the license is free, even if we are
> convinced it's not? Say it's non-free, when the DFSG 10 says the
> opposite?

Have a GR and attempt to convince the developer population at large that
the license is non-free. Given that the DFSG were written specifically
to ensure that it was free, that'll be awkward.

In practical terms, given the age of the licenses concerned, it's hard
to say that there's a flaw in one of them that prevents people from
being able to exercise their freedoms to a sufficient degree.
-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org