Re: what about Pine's license?
On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Bruce Sass wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> >
> > > [1] ftp://ftp.cac.washington.edu/pine/docs/legal.txt
> >
> > Redistribution of this release is permitted as follows, or by
> > mutual agreement:
> >
> > (a) In free-of-charge or at-cost distributions by non-profit concerns;
>
> This sounds like Debian and the ftp servers.
>
> > (b) In free-of-charge distributions by for-profit concerns;
>
> Pine doesn't want a company making money from Pine/Pico/Pilot...
>
> > (c) Inclusion in a CD-ROM collection of free-of-charge, shareware, or
> > non-proprietary software for which a fee may be charged for the
> > packaged distribution.
>
> ... but it is ok to charge for a distribution if you are producing CD's.
>
> > The above also makes it non-free.
>
> ? If Pine is non-free, then it is non-free.
>
> Why does non-free == no modified binaries?
>
Because modifiability, specificly the right to distribute modified
binaries, is a DFSG requirement.
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Reply to: