On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 10:55:13AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 08:17:13AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 08:00:00AM +0200, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL > > PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > No, we should use the liberation fonts, which are designed to replace > > > > the MS fonts. > > > > > > Have their licensing issues been solved? > > > > Which ones ? > > 1. It claims to use GPLv2, yet it has an incompatible anti-Tivo clause; it's > debatable whether it's DFSG-free. I would say it isn't, but it's not up to > me to decide. > The clause is clearly marked as an "exception", so, while obviously > non-GPL-compatible, it's a valid license, distributable and so on.
Ugh, bad me. I looked only at the license itself, the debian-legal consensus seems to be that additional restrictions over the GPL are illegal (http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg36584.html). > [...] -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
