On Mon, Oct 26, 1998 at 10:34:00AM -0600, email@example.com wrote: > It is DFSG compliant, but is ridiculously verbose and obscure. Aside from > the clauses granting permission to distribute binaries under non-free > licenses and requiring arbitration, it does nothing the GPL doesn't do, and > takes 363 lines to do it. If this thing was written by an intellectual > property attorney, he should take up defending drunk drivers. Seems to be essentially a GPL (perhaps with a few additional freedoms) written for the purposes of CUA to me. -- Show me the code or get out of my way.
Description: PGP signature