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

Re: [PEAR-QA] PHP License

Sean Kellogg <skellogg@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> [...] When a user downloads phpbb2 and joins it with PHP to
> create the finished derivative product it seems they are in violation of the
> license.

Can users call the combined thing "0x6a671236" or something?
It'd still be accurate to say it's produced from phpbb2. I doubt
many of them refer to that bit by name anyway.

Yes, it sucks. EU users might not need to worry: I think a directive
says that copying necessary to use software isn't infringement (from
memory of the summary in last Autumn's copyright consultation paper
by the European Commission).

> I was under the impression that d-l took it as one of its responsibilities
> to ensure that users don't get put in these sorts of situations.

Responsibility to ensure? Can't really ensure it, so can't really take that
responsibility on with any honesty. I think we try our best. Is picking
this over our best? PHP seem unlikely to try enforcing against phpbb2:

   Q. I've written a project in PHP that I'm going to release as open
   source, and I'd like to call it PHPTransmogrifier. Is that OK?

   A. We cannot really stop you from using PHP in the name of your
   project unless you include any code from the PHP distribution [...]

(from http://www.php.net/license/ )

Having a PEAR-approved licence which requires untruthful statements
seems a more obvious and fixable problem.

My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: