Re: Name restriction and forced acknowledgement OK?
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 05:05:37PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
...
> Whatever good intentions they may have, they should not deny users the
> freedoms to implement functions in different ways (iauEpj2jd_cached),
> or to combine it with another library that includes a function called
> iauque (for example).
>
> If they want to assure people that iauEpj2jd is their iauEpj2jd, they
> should probably do something like gpg-signing their source code, rather
> than try to use copyright to stop other functions with the same name.
> As noted above, it doesn't stop independent libraries.
>
> > > It fails DFSG 3.
> >
> > Why? It just requires that they get a different name.
>
> I would have said it fails DFSG 4. One rename is fine, but this
> requires that everything is renamed, which is a practical pain in the
> bum for no good effect, and tries to grab an infinite number of names.
So the extent of renames is the fine line between this and free program
like TeX? tex is only used by tex and others use renamed commands like
xetex ...
Anyway, good luck convincing them. If they stay with branding only
requirement, it is much cleaner.
Osamu
Reply to: