On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 11:41:06AM -0700, McCoy Smith wrote: > Seems like it might violate the definition of appropriate legal notice in > GPLv3.
... hence, one should be able to just remove these de facto "further restrictions", as per: > All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further > restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as > you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that > it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further > restriction, you may remove that term. Right? -- Stefano Zacchiroli . [email protected] . upsilon.cc/zack _. ^ ._ Full professor of Computer Science o o o \/|V|\/ Télécom Paris, Polytechnic Institute of Paris o o o </> <\> Co-founder & CTO Software Heritage o o o o /\|^|/\ Former Debian Project Leader & OSI Board Director '" V "' _______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
