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

Re: PHPNuke license

I've been thinking a bit about this license and 2c in general. I'm not
particularly happy about 2c because it restricts the ability of
programs to be used in specific ways. I can't yet codify what I feel
is wrong with it, and what I would do to change it, but I hope to be
able to do so in a few days.

On Sun, 02 Mar 2003, Nick Phillips wrote:
> It's the "modification" that is covered, and you're not allowed to
> modify in such a way as to remove a copyright notice that is normally
> displayed on startup.

You are allowed to modify the code to remove the copyright notice, but
you are not allowed to distribute code that contains such a
modification. [2a-c only applies to distribution of modifications. The
first part of 2 "You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or
any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program" is
typically interpreted to mean that any modification is allowed, as
long as you don't distribute it. (Fair use also comes into play here.)]

The question seemingly revolves around whether or not PHPNuke is being
distributed when the end user deploys the software.

If it isn't, then the author's blocking end user modification doesn't
fall under the GPL, and the license should be changed to reflect the
author's wishes [if the author can in fact do so.]

If it is, then we have to determine whether the inability to hide the
copyright announcement makes the program restricted enough for it to
be non-free. My current gut feeling is that the copyright announcement
should be accessible to the end user, in a manner calculated to be
readily apparent, but it need not harass the user in every invocation.

Don Armstrong

Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did, we'd be
running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and listening to
repetitive music.


Attachment: pgppiJUOvtKC3.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: