Re: Distributability of Ruby's PDF::Writer
* John Halton:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 09:11:19PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Gunnar Wolf:
>>
>> > 2- This is the main reason I contact -legal: The short license
>> > regarding the Adobe PostScript AFM files does mention 'for any
>> > purpose and without charge'. How would you interpret this?
>>
>> Compare the Adobe AFM license and the MIT license. 8-)
>
> Heh. Fair point. But the MIT licence is clearer: "Permission is hereby
> granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy...". No risk
> of confusion there.
There are several variants of the MIT license, including one that uses
"permission to use [...] for any purpose and without fee is hereby
granted". MIT itself uses this variant for Kerberos 5. It's less
popular than the non-ambigous wording, it seems, but even our own
reportbug falls into the ambiguous category.
Grepping for "and without fee is hereby" in /usr/share/doc/*/copyright
yields quite interesting results.
Reply to: