On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 07:35:56PM +0200, Anders Bergh wrote: > I've modified the zlib/libpng license to be a bit more restrictive for > commercial usage.. I would like to get some feedback, It's not free. > and I also wonder if > it's legally "usable". We can sometimes tell you why a license isn't viable. We can never tell you that it *is*. You have to hire a lawyer to do that. > For commercial usage these restrictions applies aswell: > > 4. You must have written permission by the respective copyright holders > for using this software. This really means "this license is for non-commercial use only. ask us about commercial licenses". Therefore, non-free. "Written permission" *is* the license; this document has just said that it is not such a license. > 5. The usage of this software must be acknowledged somewhere easily > accessible for the end user, such as the about box or product > documentation. Vague. What's 'usage', 'accessible', and 'end user'? Not that it matters, given #4. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature