On 2004-04-24 12:40:13 +0100 Sami Liedes <sliedes@cc.hut.fi> wrote: [quoting:]
Finally, nothing in this license shall be interpreted to allow you to fail to fairly credit me, or to remove my credits such as by creating a front end that hides my credits from the user or renaming mkreiser4 to mkyourcompanyfs or even just make_filesystem, without my permission, unless you are an end user not redistributing to others. If you have doubts about how to properly do that, or about what is fair, ask. (Last I spoke with him Richard was contemplating how best to address the fair crediting issue in the next GPL version.)
The part about credits seems uncontroversial, as long as credits really means credits like "Copyright 2004 MJ Ray". Claiming that the name of the binary is a credit seems to make it non-free, just as I think "must print page of adverts and ode to my goldfish when run" is too.
Surely a license cannot add anything to the set of derived works [...]
No, but it can warn us that they may be more likely to try suing over a grey area. I think debian usually takes note of what the licensor writes, if there's any question.
-- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know. Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/