Re: Fw: [argouml-dev] Licence issue (debian in particular)
>>>>> "Henning" == Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:
Henning> Scripsit Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org>
>> On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:33:50AM +0200, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
>> > * You acknowledge that Software is not designed, licensed or
>> intended for > * use in the design, construction, operation or
>> maintenance of any nuclear > * facility.
>> This seems to fail DFSG#6: No Discrimination Against Fields of
>> Endeavor.
Henning> Im my reading, it is just a peculiarly written warranty
Henning> disclaimer ... hm, oops, no, the word "licensed" seems
Henning> definitely out of place here. Wonder what they mean by
Henning> that, but I agree that we should not consider it as free
Henning> until we get clarification from the licensor.
It's not clear to me whether the word licenced refers to a software
license, or to US regulatory licenses you would need to get in order
to use said software in a nuclear facility.
If we have the option of interpreting this text to mean that Sun asks
you to acknowledge that the software has not been approved (licensed)
for use in such facilities by the appropriate parts of the US
government, then we should do so, especially if it renders the license
free.
--Sam
Reply to: