Re: Why is OpenSSL not in non-free?
Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> Could someone update http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses and
> http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ accordingly?
>
> Currently both pages sound as if it the 4-clause BSD licence would not
> meet the DFSG.
I'd happily update http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ but I can't
see how it makes it sounds as if 4-clause BSD wouldn't meet DFSG. Can
you clarify? I don't want to encourage it because it has practical
problems when combined with the GPLs, but it's OK for main.
I can't update http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses well and everyone
should be very reluctant to use an unattributed wiki as a primary
source. I didn't find much there about 4-clause BSD either, really.
> > Even the FSF considers it free.
>
> The FSF also considers the GFDL with invariant sections as free...
Not free software. RMS claimed such a question doesn't matter, in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/09/msg01221.html
I feel it's pretty obviously not free software and it's pretty obvious
why that's harmful - see: http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/fdl#general
Hope that explains,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: