Re: Copyright of fontinst.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 4 May 1998, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> some time ago I expressed the intent to package fontinst
> (a TeX/LaTeX package). I asked the author about the licence
> and here's what I got. It is not DFSG but we *do* have latex
> in tetex. So is it right for main? Thanx, federico.
> ----- Forwarded message -----
> The fontinst package is distributed under the same
> restrictions as LaTeX, ie it should be distributed unchanged.
Not all of LaTeX in teTeX have this restrictive license.
That's why part of it have been moved to tetex-nonfree in non-free.
I think most of LaTeX is covered by the special DFSG condition
"The license may require derived works to carry a different name or
version number from the original software.".
If this applies to fontinst, then it would be ok for main. If it just
forbids derived works, not even under a different name, it surely would
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com