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

Re: Debian Package for Phylip - stripped to 3 questions

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, John Galt wrote:

> >You might try to just raise a few questions:
> >1. Does any version of GPL restrict how much money redistributers
> >   can charge for the software?
> The artistic sort of does, but that's not really a VERSION of the GPL
> _per se_, it's a completely different license.
I think Joe was looking for *any DFSG free* license which complies
with his three points.

> >2. Does any version of GPL require the software developer to be
> >   paid a royalty on money charged for redistribution?
> >3. Does any version of GPL restrict people in any way from charging
> >   for people to run the software on the seller's machine?  Or
> >   require a royalty to the software developer for this?
> I think that the artistic may do all the author wants and still be DFSG
> free...  It's just GPL imcompatible.
This would mean I can´t link GPLed programs against Phylip?  Well I
think the current licence also conflicts with GPL and using the
Artistic License would at least make Phylip DFSG free which I
would consider as an advantage.

> >I suspect the answer to all three questions is "no", but would be
> >happy to hear what the Debian folks think is the case.
> He's right, the GPL is completely not indicated in this case.
Regardsing GPL he is obviousely right, but if Artistic License fits
his need Phylip could go into main.

Kind regards


PS: Joe, find the Artistic License for instance under


Reply to: