Re: Selling Artistic License Software
I've been following this thread and it left me rather puzzled; I was
sure that I'd read the Artistic License and would have remembered if
it had restrictions like those that are being suggested here.
For example, Dale wrote that
it clearly restricts distribution "for sale"
but the words "sale" and "sell" do not appear in the Licence !
What provision of the licence - please quote the exact text, in
context - violates the DFSG ?
The sentence that seems to me to be the basis of the problem is here:
5. You may charge a reasonable copying fee for any distribution of
this Package. You may charge any fee you choose for support of this
Package. You may not charge a fee for this Package itself. However,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
you may distribute this Package in aggregate with other (possibly
commercial) programs as part of a larger (possibly commercial)
software distribution provided that you do not advertise this Package
as a product of your own.
The sentence is problematic because it is vague. What does it mean to
`charge a fee for this Package' ? What precisely is being paid for ?
Remember that software itself cannot be bought and sold like ordinary
property (text in the DFSG notwithstanding). A fee might be either a
fee for the act of distribution, or for granting a licence to use the
program.
My view would be that that sentence is intended to make it clear that
you can't charge for licenses or permission to use Perl, or for other
rights to do with it. If it is interpreted as meaning that you can't
charge a copying fee for media containing only the program then it
would directly contradict the first sentence of s.5, which even uses
the word `any' to strengthen its scope.
The final sentence is IMO a further clarification, rather than an
exception.
Ian.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: