On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:13:06 -0500 Glenn Maynard wrote: > Overall, I don't see any strong feeling on this list that this license > is non-free, and that's a reasonable rationale for closing these bugs. If you think this license is *not* non-free, could you please explain me why you consider the overreaching super-name-change clause as acceptable? I would be happy to find out that PHP is already DFSG-free, after all: so, please, persuade me... The clause under discussion is: | 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor | may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission | from group@php.net. You may indicate that your software works in | conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling | it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo" As a reminder, I see this clause as non-free because it starts as a name-change clause, but then goes beyond and forbids an entire class of names for derived works (any name having "PHP" as a substring, minus some exceptions). This is overreaching, IMO, and makes the clause non-free, even when applied to PHP itself. It gets even worse when applied to anything that is not PHP itself. -- :-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-) ...................................................................... Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpia12E1meIS.pgp
Description: PGP signature