Re: ocaml, QPL and the DFSG : QPL 3b argumentation.

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 09:23:30PM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 12:59:33PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > >   1) QPL 3b. A is allowed to integrate changes from M into the original
> > >   software in both the QPL licence and some other licence it is dually
> > >   licenced with (GPL or proprietary). The claim that this fails DFSG #1 has
> > >   been made, if you consider this right a fee or royalty.
> > 
> > | 3. You may make modifications to the Software and distribute your
> > | modifications, in a form that is separate from the Software, such as
> > | patches. The following restrictions apply to modifications:
> > 
> > This covers modification of the original software. Only path (or patch-like)
> > distribution is allowed here. This is expressely allowed by DFSG #4.
> > 
> > |       a. Modifications must not alter or remove any copyright notices
> > |       in the Software.
> > 
> > Again, pretty standard.
> 
> Actually, I just realized this might be a problem.  Files often have
> copyright notices in them.  You can't have a patch which entirely
> removes those files.
> 
> Also, the program may print out a copyright notice (as in GPL 3c).
> You are not allowed to add your own name to that list.

I suppose common sense clearly solve this issue, but would a modification of
the clause solve this ? It is too early for me to find any nice wording for
this today though.

Friendly,

Sven Luther