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

Re: DFSG-ness of two



On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:46:04 +0900
Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote:
> Le Sat, May 30, 2015 at 11:26:59AM +1000, Riley Baird a écrit :
> > > > - 3. You may not have any income from distributing this source
> > > > -    (or altered version of it) to other developers. When You
> > > > -    use this product in a comercial package, the source may
> > > > -    not be charged seperatly.
> > > 
> > > This clause is really annoying, but it seems to allow the file to be
> > > sold as part of a commercial package. Hence, it could perhaps be
> > > considered to meet DFSG#1.
> > 
> > But a developer doesn't have the freedom to sell the software for
> > profit to other developers.
> 
> as suggested in the original question, this clause is similar to clause 1 of
> the SIL Open Font License 1.1, which is DFSG-Free.
> 
>   > Neither the Font Software nor any of its individual components, in Original
>   > or Modified Versions, may be sold by itself.

The second sentence is similar to the Open Font License, but I was
talking about the first sentence.

> Have a nice week-end,

You too!

Attachment: pgpYfFjtGrEPU.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: