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

Re: license check for tqsllib

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> I want to package tqsllib and trustedqsl, which are a ham radio
> application. However the DFSGness is not clear to me so I welcome
> your comments. It appears to me to be similar to the BSD including
> the advertising clause. How do we deal with that scenario these days?

We've generally been interpreting such clauses as DFSG free[1], with
caveats related to linking and noting that the advertising clause
itself is just barely on the free side of the free<->non-free border.

If possible, I'd appreciate if you can try to get upstream to follow
the UC Regents lead and remove the advertising clause from their
license, as it the copyright itself is generally enough advertisement.
(There's an excellent analysis of it at
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html) If you need any assistance, or
if they have questions, feel free to refer them to -legal.

Don Armstrong

1: I personally don't really like the advertising clause, and
sometimes wish we could jettison all software that uses it. I think my
view is a minority one, but it's possible that in the future more
people will come forward with reasonable arguments for the
non-freeness of software with such an advertising clause.
There are two types of people in this world, good and bad. The good
sleep better, but the bad seem to enjoy the waking hours much more.  
 -- Woody Allen


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: