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

Re: Debian Legal summary of the X-Oz License (Proposed)

Scripsit Simon Law <sfllaw@debian.org>

>        3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, if
>           any, must include the following acknowledgment:
>             "This product includes software developed by X-Oz Technologies
>              (http://www.x-oz.com/)."
>           Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself,
>           if and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear.

> Clause 3 is a complex statement, which appears to be derived from the
> obsolete four-clause BSD license.  We believe that this clause can be
> satisfied by including the license text as end-user documentation.

I am not so sure anymore, after Branden has testified [:-)] that the
author has explicitly refused to change it to a more conventional and
unambiguous. Given that it's certainly *possible* to interpret the
clause as meaning something nasty, I think we shouldn't touch it with
a poker until and unless the author officially endorces a clear and
clearly DFSG-free interpretation of the clause.

Henning Makholm               "The Board views the endemic use of PowerPoint
                           briefing slides instead of technical papers as an
 illustration of the problematic methods of technical communicaion at NASA."

Reply to: