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

Re: Licence for new package algol68toc

Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> writes:

> Sian Mountbatten <poenikatu@fastmail.co.uk> writes:
> > Please find attached the copyright for this new package.
> Where is the new package? There are multiple licenses, and it's not
> clear what they're referring to. The freedom of a work is best
> determined by examining the work and the license together.

While waiting for the work to know what the license grants are referring
to, here are some comments on the terms.

> The original source of the QAD Standard Prelude can be had on demand
> from the maintainer.

What happens when the maintainer is not contactable?

> Here is the copyright of the Ctrans source:-

>   (b)  any amended version of this Program be clearly marked to show the
>        nature of the amendment and of the name of the amending
>        organisation,

This fails the Dissident test: it forbids the recipient from making
anonymous changes to the work and redistributing them.

>   and
>   (c)  any recipient  of such reproduction or amended version accept the
>        conditions set out in this legend.

This is a non-free restriction. The license grant must not depend on the
recipient actively doing anything (the same reason that “postcardware”
is non-free).

I would recommend the maintainer collaborate with upstream to re-license
that work under a widely-used well-understood free-software license. The
apparent intent seems best met by a 3-clause BSD license, but maybe the
simpler Expat terms would be satisfactory.

 \     “I was sad because I had no shoes, until I met a man who had no |
  `\       feet. So I said, ‘Got any shoes you're not using?’” —Steven |
_o__)                                                           Wright |
Ben Finney

Reply to: