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

Re: mixmaster license

On Tue, May 09, 2000 at 07:22:59AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, 9 May 2000, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> >...
> > One part that I don't like about the new license[1] is the following
> > paragraph (1.b.iii):
> > 
> >     [you may modify and distribute the source only iff you]
> >        provide Anonymizer Inc. with a copy of the Source Code of
> >        such modifications or work by electronic mail, and grant
> >        Anonymizer Inc. a perpetual, royalty-free license to use and
> >        distribute the modifications or work in its products.
> > 
> > Am I correct to assume that this would make the package go into
> > non-free?
> I think this is DFSG-free and can go to main.

I don't.  WHat if Anonymizer Inc. goes out of business?  All of a sudden
everyone loses the right to modify and distribute the source code.

Perhaps we need to add some notes to the DFSG explaining why clauses like
the above are unacceptable.

G. Branden Robinson            |            You live and learn.
Debian GNU/Linux               |            Or you don't live long.
branden@ecn.purdue.edu         |            -- Robert Heinlein
roger.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpqxOEdUFn4W.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: