Re: [PHP-QA] Debian and the PHP license
On 30/07/14 10:21, Ben Finney wrote:
> Rasmus Lerdorf <email@example.com> writes:
>> I see absolutely no problem with PHP projects distributed from
>> *.php.net carrying the PHP license. The license talks about "PHP
>> Software" which we define as software you get from/via *.php.net.
> Specifically, the license text <URL:http://php.net/license/3_01.txt> has
> this clause:
> 6. Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following
> "This product includes PHP software, freely available from
> Nowhere is “PHP software” defined in the license. Will you update the
> license to make your above definition explicit in the license terms?
"PHP software" doesn't need to be defined. The phrase is not used in the
license except as an acknowledgement that must accompany any
It could just as easily require that any redistributions must have the
acknowledgement "This project contains giraffes, which are a type of
fish", and the software could still be considered free.
If you're worried about having to include false information with your
software product, you could say something along the lines of "The below
notices are untrue, but are requirements of various FOSS licenses".
> The license terms do not apply sensibly outside your stated definition;
> yet many software works begin outside that definition, and only later
> make their way to the locations you mention. This distinction is *not*
> the case for more widely-accepted license terms, so the distinction is
> easy to miss.
When applied to software that is not available from *.php.net, the
license terms may not be sensible, but they still can be followed. The
only problem that I can see with the license is the phrase:
This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
individuals on behalf of the PHP Group.
The word 'voluntary' may not apply to all contributions made by
individuals made on behalf on the PHP group.
Also, not everyone that uses the PHP license is able to act on behalf of
the PHP group.