Re: Maia Mailguard License
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 04:17:14PM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
> The origionally posted license seemed to imply that clauses 3 and 4 were
> alternatives, and you only had to meet one of them; clause 3 appeared to
> more or less be a BSD advertising clause (cross-reference the 'flowc'
> licensing discussion...)
> If it's free, then wouldn't that make the license free (by not exercising
> option 4 at all, making it irrelevant)? I agree that trying to invoke
> option 4 wouldn't work.
You have to satisfy both #3 and #4: you have to do 3 *as well as* one of 4a,
4b or 4c.
Maybe you read #4 as part of "Alternatively ...". The "alternatively" is
part of #3, and unrelated to #4.