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

Re: license requirements for a book to be in free section

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 02:38:30AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 05:29:38PM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
> >   Permission is hereby granted to copy, reproduce, redistribute or
> >   otherwise use this software as long as:  there is no monetary profit
> >   gained specifically from the use or reproduction of this software, it
> >   is not sold, rented, traded or otherwise marketed, and this copyright
> >   notice is included prominently in any copy made.  Software bundlers
> >   who include trn among other diverse applications are exempt from this
> >   restriction, as long as the distribution includes trn's source code
> >   (including this license).
> > It *feels* non-free, but technically it allows people to sell the
> > software as part of an aggregate distribution as demanded by DFSG#1, and
> > it doesn't seem to breach the other points. Does this signal that it
> > should be in main, that there's a deficiency in the DFSG, that there's a
> > deficiency in my understanding, or something else?
> That doesn't only restrict selling it, it restrict using it ("no
> monetary profit gained specifically from the use ... of this software.")
> Doesn't permission to modify need to be given explicitely, too?

Both true, and I'd missed the latter (though I have commit access to
upstream CVS anyway ...). Thanks. I still find it curious that the
clause restricting commercial redistribution of the software by itself
seems to be OK.

Upstream tried to change the licence to something BSD-like in the past,
but the presence of some ancient code by other contributors
unfortunately prevented that.

Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]

Reply to: