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

Re: BCFG Public License

This one time, at band camp, MJ Ray said:
> John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> asked:
> > The BCFG public license (below) seems pretty much like a standard BSD
> > + advertising clause license.  I can't quite seem to remember what the
> > current policy on that sort of license is. 
> Accepted but unpopular.

This is untrue..  The DFSG endorses it without reservation.  It would
be best when reviewing a license for it's inclusion in Debian to follow
the DFSG.

> I agree with questioning needing to agree stuff about US laws.

I think this is already adequately explained elsewhere.

> I'm curious what rights are reserved by the US Government - this
> licence looks like it's not complete without knowing that.

I don't see any rights reserved by the US government in that license.
I see an explicit grant of rights to the US government and the standard
no warranty clause extended to the US government, but that's it.
Neither of these are freeness issues.
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran@debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: