On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:00:06 +0100 Ben Hutchings wrote: > Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au> writes: [...] > > They're explicitly allowed (though discouraged, as you noted) when > > the requirement is in place for *modified* works. The license in > > question is requiring a name change for even *unmodified* works, and > > that's non-free. > > But if I rename before uploading the package to Debian, then that > provision is nullified. So I think the licence would then be free in > so far as it applied to the Debian package. Right? Mmmmh, would I be allowed to grab the Debian package, and rename it as ion3, without other modifications (and distribute the result whenever I feel like doing so)? I mean: would the clause be really nullified? Or rather, would it just not apply to Debian, but still be ready to kick in as soon as I do something to the package? I'm definitely uncomfortable with sleeping clauses which could get suddenly awake when you least expect... :-( -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpeOqK8Npn9w.pgp
Description: PGP signature