Re: License review request: LinuxMagic FSCL
Ryan Finnie wrote:
> Thank you for your comments (everybody else too). Sorry for not
> following up sooner; please see question below.
> On 9/27/06, Walter Landry <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> MJ Ray <email@example.com> wrote:
>> > Ryan Finnie <firstname.lastname@example.org> asked for help with:
>> > > (c) You must make Source Code of all Your Deployed Modifications
>> > > publicly available under the terms of this License, including the
>> > > license grants set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you
>> > > Deploy the Covered Code or twelve (12) months from the date of
>> > > initial Deployment, whichever is longer. You should preferably
>> > > distribute the Source Code of Your Deployed Modifications
>> > > electronically (e.g. download from a web site); and
>> > This looks like forced *public* availability and a 12-month retainer,
>> > which I think is both a significant cost (so not free redistribution)
>> > and maybe a practical problem.
>> If you need to make any modifications, then with this clause, I don't
>> think that it can even be uploaded to non-free. Debian does not
>> insure that every version ever distributed will be available for 12
> How does this differ for the GPL's section 3(b) three-year clause?
Debian doesn't distribute under 3(b), it distributes under 3(a).
> At this point, the feeling seems to be that software that uses this
> license cannot even be uploaded to non-free.
> If that is the case, I
> will make an effort to contact LinuxMagic and ask them if they can
> re-license magic-smtpd under the GPL (it looks like some of their
> other software is GPL-licensed), and/or ask them to contact
> debian-legal to discuss what can be done to make it possible to
> include magic-smtpd with Debian.
> Again, thanks for the input.
> Ryan Finnie
Nathanael Nerode <email@example.com>
Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...