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

Re: summary of software licenses in non-free

On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 11:11:52AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> FWIW, our handling of the 3270 code doesn't seem undue caution; 

i'm not sure about that.

look closely at each license in the copyright file.  all but one explicitly
grant the right to "use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
documentation for any purpose".  the one that doesn't neglects to mention

admittedly, i didn't spend much time on it, but at first (and even second)
glance, these packages seem to be DFSG-free.

> the same principle applies to angband, AIUI -- we *think* the copyright
> holders

no, the moria/angband/tome/zangband etc packages are different.  they say "This
software may be copied and distributed for educational, research, and not for
profit purposes".  i.e.  you're not allowed to copy them for profit.

> OTOH, this does point out some potentially "low-hanging fruit" in non-free --
> packages that, with a bit of effort on someone's part, might be eligible for
> inclusion in main.


there also seemed to be a few packages where only one or two source files are
under a non-DFSG license.  if they could be replaced then the entire package
would be truly free.

> > -----------
> My only comment here is that, to use this definition of "almost" free,

in hindsight, using "ALMOST FREE" as the label for the 4th group was wrong.
while many (maybe even most) of the packages are what i consider to be
almost-free, several of them are not even close.  "OTHER" or "UNCLASSIFIED"
would have been more appropriate.


Reply to: