Re: Licence for new package algol68toc
Ben Finney <email@example.com> writes:
> Sian Mountbatten <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
This fails the Dissident test: it forbids the recipient from making
anonymous changes to the work and redistributing them.
> (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”
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 |