> Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm confused. The license posted looks like a straight 3-clause BSD
> license to me, which is surely DFSG-free. What problems do you have
> with it?
It was not entirely clear that the license is BSD (it isnot referred in
the text). It appeared to be custom made, which would better have peer
review unless that had already been taken place prior this bug report.
In that case the bug is no issue.
Observations:
#1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
# notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
#2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
# notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
# documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
Text referring "The above copyright notice" is nowhere to be found.
There is no "notice" above. Only line referring to the person holding
the copyright (and range years).
#3. Neither the name of the author nor the names of other contributors
# may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
# without specific prior written permission.
Does this extend to "derived" works? In that case, it restricts the
other authors to express another viewpoint to the "promote products",
because of previous requirement "must retain...list of conditions" that
apply to other authors?
Does the last (3) clause limit the commercial and promotional use?
According to policy:
Free Redistribution
The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party
================
from selling or giving away the software as a component of an
=======
aggregate software distribution containing programs from several
different sources. The license may not require a royalty or
other fee for such sale.
As i understand, selling can include include advertising work, i.e.
mentioning authors that have created derived work.
Jari
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
