Re: Advice on packaging SAGE
Charles Plessy <charles-debian-nospam@plessy.org> writes:
> I see it as violating clause 6:
> No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
> The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a
> specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program
> from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
I think this is an indefensible stretch. You're basically arguing that
violating the license terms is a field of endeavor. I don't think any
license other than public domain would survive that argument.
> Depending of the wording, the citation clauses forbid the usage of the
> programs for works published in articles which do not proprerly cite the
> program.
So you believe the four-clause BSD license violates the DFSG? It contains
the clause:
* 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
* must display the following acknowledgement:
* This product includes software developed by the University of
* California, Berkeley and its contributors.
I believe this is not the interpretation being applied by the ftpmasters,
who are the final authorities on licenses in Debian. The four-clause BSD
license is not a particularly good idea, but I believe it's always been
considered DFSG-free.
Or am I missing some subtlety of your argument?
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: