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

Re: DFSG audit of X-Oz license wanted

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004, David Nusinow wrote:
> If there could be some sort of determination of whether or not this
> license is DFSG compliant, we can push ahead and potentially use it.

This license is basically equivalent to the 4 clause BSD license, and
as such is generally[1] considered to be DFSG Free.

However, before using it in Debian's XFree86 packages[2] I strongly
suggest working with the copyright holder to remove the advertising
clause. With a few notable (and sometimes annoyingly comical)
exceptions, almost everyone whose licenses started with the
advertising clause has since removed it, as they recognize how
pointless they rapidly become.

See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html if you need more concrete

Feel free to involve me and/or other -legal denizens if upstream needs
more convincing, assuming this code is something that would be
benificial to Debian.

Don Armstrong

1: There are some (including myself) who are on the fence on this
issue, and would like nothing better than to see works with these
abnoxious advertising clauses go away.
2: Considering the bruhaha over the XFree86 1.1 license, I doubt
Branden will welcome such code in xfree86.
Guns Don't Kill People.
*I* Kill People.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: