Re: Is this a free license?
Jim Penny <email@example.com> writes:
> So, does that not make qmail free? There is no problem in distributing
> the unchanged tarball, and we are, after all, simply distributing a
> patchset that modifies it to support FHS.
Two important differences:
1) Qmail prohibits unapproved patches; Unicode does not. Unicode
welcomes modification of the data they provide ("extraction",
remember), qmail prohibits it.
2) A qmail binary can only be distributed if compiled from the
approved qmail source. A unicode-implementing program (or "program
that uses data exctracted from Unicode") contains no such
restriction, you can implement part of Unicode, you can use the
data to implement something totally contrary to the spirit of
Unicode, you can do what you want with it. Qmail, no deal.