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

Re: Request licence review



On Wednesday 02 May 2007 11:13:48 Andrew Sidwell wrote:
> Redistribution of unaltered copies of this document is permitted without
> restriction.  Distribution of altered copies is permitted without
> restriction as long as the alteration does not significantly alter the
> content (For example, translation and conversion to another format is
> permitted.).  Distribution of all other altered copies is permitted as
> long as credit for previous authors is maintained, the contact
> information is replaced with that of the alterer, and redistribution is
> not further restricted.

With the third case ("all other altered copies") which is what would apply 
if you start changing the manual, you've got to:

  1) Maintain credit for previous authors.

This is fine. Most free licenses, like the GPL, require you to keep the 
copyright notice as-is; this is even less restrictive.

  2) Put your contact information.

This is fine. Many free licenses, like the GPL, require you to mark altered 
copies with the date of modification; this is even less restrictive.

  3) Don't add any further restrictions.

This is fine. However, you can't further restrict things, so you basically 
have to use the same license. This is basically a (non-GPL compatible) form 
of copyleft.

> I'd just like to check if this is DFSG-free or not; I think it is, but
> since one of the reasons for making the code Free is so it can be
> included in Linux distributions and use services like SourceForge, I
> don't want to inadvertently introduce non-free stuff into the game.

It's DFSG free, but it doesn't seem GPL compatible because of #3. I could 
see the documentation being under a different license as the code being 
slightly annoying, but not a DFSG problem.

-- 
Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net> <xmpp:wjl@icecavern.net>
OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094  0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2

Attachment: pgpQrKanYCVmu.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: