Re: sphpblog License-Question (modified/expanded GPL)
Cord Beermann <cord@debian.org> writes:
> I want to add a package to Debian with the following
> License-Statement:
Does this mean you are the sole copyright holder? Or is this a work
derived from someone else's work? What is the license of that existing
work?
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The Simple PHP Blog is released under the GNU Public License.
There's no such license. You probably mean the "GNU General Public
License, version 2 or, at your option, any later version".
> You are free to use and modify the Simple PHP Blog. All changes must
> be uploaded to SourceForge.net under Simple PHP Blog.
This is an unreasonable requirement; the recipient may have no means
of satisfying this, but your license terms demand they do so anyway.
It also contradicts the GNU GPL: you're placing an extra restriction
on the recipient which isn't already in the GPL. This makes the work
unredistributable, because no redistributor can satisfy both the GPL
and your extra restriction.
> Credit must be give to the original author
Fine; this is already part of the GNU GPL version 2.
> and the Simple PHP Blog logo graphic must appear on the site and
> link to the project on SourceForge.net
This is an extra restriction, and has exactly the same problem as
discussed above.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Does this make the package incompatible to DFSG?
It currently is self-contradictory, which means no recipient can
distribute it at all.
> PS: Please keep the Cc on the wnpp-bug #421513
--
\ "Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have |
`\ to murder a loved one because they're the devil." -- Emo |
_o__) Philips |
Ben Finney
Reply to: