On Sat, 07 May 2011 23:38:38 +0200 Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > Le samedi 07 mai 2011 à 23:20 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : > > since I don't think CeCILL-C meets the DFSG: > A bit out of topic but you are probably wrong here. All CeCILL licenses > are DFSG compliant.
Where may I find a detailed analysis that explains how the CeCILL-C license meets the DFSG? I am only aware of the following analysis: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/01/msg00171.html Please note that I have already cited this analysis, see http://bugs.debian.org/618696#41 The analysis by Joe Smith highlights the GPL-incompatibility and two possible DFSG-freeness issues. I agree that those issues make the license fail to meet the DFSG. Especially, the choice of venue is an issue that has been discussed to death on debian-legal for various licenses (with disagreeing opinions from many people): my own personal opinion is that choice of venue clauses are non-free restrictions. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgprY2hRS0SFI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
