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

Re: PHPNuke license

On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 05:36:11PM -0500, David Turner wrote:
> > If a web-based CMS constitutes "interactive use" in any fashion, I would
> > argue that this could only be so inasmuch as we consider clicking on links
> > within the website to be part of a single interactive session, because
> > otherwise you have a number of one-shot calls that are not interactive at
> > all.  Furthermore, "the most ordinary way" for beginning an interactive
> > session is by starting at the index page and drilling down.  So as I see
> > it, the worst case is that the GPL could require you to display the
> > copyright/warranty announcement on the entry page of the web app, but
> > nothing more.

> This seems reasonable to me.

> > The PHP-Nuke author has demanded more than this, however; that's his
> > prerogative, but I think this puts PHP-Nuke into the same category as
> > pine where the copyright holder's exceptional interpretation has rendered
> > an otherwise free license non-free.

> Yes, but perhaps he could be convinced to go to the version you propose
> above.  I would add my voice to that.

To be honest, my primary concern here is building consensus about where
we draw the line wrt the DFSG-freeness of copyright banners, including
the implications of the grandfathered GPL 2(c).  As a piece of software
I find PHP-Nuke particularly underwhelming, and think it would be no
great loss if it were removed from Debian whether for licensing or other
reasons.  If you believe there's a reasonable chance of convincing him to
change the license, I'm willing to lend a few lines to the cause, but my
(admittedly second-hand) impression as something of a PHP insider is that
he's not likely to budge.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpiKJwhgPsIu.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: