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


Mariusz Przygodzki <dune@home.pl> wrote:
>Is anybody can advise me if the OPL license 
>(http://www.opencontent.org/opl.shtml) is or isn't in compliance with DFSG?

Insofar as it makes sense to classify it under software guidelines, I
believe it is.

>I especially concerns about two following points:
>   a) You must cause the modified content to carry prominent notices
>   stating that you changed it, the exact nature and content of the
>   changes, and the date of any change.

No problem. It's a lot less restrictive than some of the things that
DFSG 4 allows. Note also that this is almost exactly the same clause as
GPL 2(a).

>   b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
>   whole or in part contains or is derived from the OC or any part
>   thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties
>   under the terms of this License, unless otherwise permitted under
>   applicable Fair Use law.

Obviously no problem. Think about what the GPL says, for example!

Colin Watson                                     [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]

Reply to: