Mariusz Przygodzki <email@example.com> 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
> 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 [firstname.lastname@example.org]
- Re: OPL
- From: Gaute B Strokkenes <email@example.com>
- From: Mariusz Przygodzki <firstname.lastname@example.org>