[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: teTeX package licenses and their distribution restrictions (long)



   From: Steve Dunham <dunham@cps.msu.edu>
   Date: 28 Mar 1998 00:07:04 -0500

   Richard Kaszeta <kaszeta@me.umn.edu> writes:

   > In response to recent requests of both the teTeX and debian-devel
   > mailling lists, I have gone through the packages include in teTeX-0.9
   > to examine the licensing.

   I see no mention of latex/tools/multicol.sty, which contains this
   statement:


   %% ** The use of this package as part of a commercial application is
   %% ** not allowed without the explicit permission of the author of
   %% ** this package.  Such commercial usage will be subject to the
   %% ** payment of a license fee.  The size of this fee is to be
   %% ** determined, in each instance, by the commercial user, depending
   %% ** on his judgment of the value of the code for his application.


   Is it not in teTeX 0.9?

You bet.  This stuff has escaped me.  Perhaps one should talk to
the author about it, it is pretty untolerable that a core LateX
component may not be used for commercial purposes, as this would
preclude even selling the TeX live CD with multicol on it, or at the
very least selling things like Scientific Word and sorts.

Another package worth noting is FoilTeX the licensing of which permits
only "personal, experimental, non-commercial" use.  While the author
of it admits that this sort of stuff was wedged in by IBM's lawyers
and his interpretation would be that typesetting with the package
constitutes an experiment, in case of doubt (improbable) he is not
likely to be asked.

David Kastrup                                     Phone: +49-234-700-5570
Email: dak@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de       Fax: +49-234-709-4209
Institut für Neuroinformatik, Universitätsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


Reply to: