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

Re: FreeBSD legacy license with restrictions on copyright notice placement

>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Fontana <rfontana@redhat.com> writes:

    Richard> I'm curious if there are opinions on why "must retain the
    Richard> above copyright notice immediately at the beginning of the
    Richard> file" is consistent with the DFSG. This is one of a variety
    Richard> of 1990s FreeBSD 3-clause BSD variants with such a feature.

Well, under DFSG 4, the license could have required that no
modifications be made to the source file at all:

>    4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
>       The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in
>       modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch
>       files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the
>       program at build time. The license must explicitly permit
>       distribution of software built from modified source code. The
>       license may require derived works to carry a different name or
>       version number from the original software. (This is a compromise.
>       The Debian group encourages all authors not to restrict any files,
>       source or binary, from being modified.)

So, it would be DFSG compatible if the license required an unmodified
file be distributed that was patched at build time.
This is clearly a lot better than that, and appears to grant our users
the same freedoms as would be the case if DFSG 4 were needed.

So I'll toss it back to you:
which condition of the DFSG would be violated by this license?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: