>> 1. Any changes should be forwarded to the original author for inclusion >> in a later release of the tools. > >No problem, since it's "should", not "must".
I'm not convinced that this distinction is really meaningful. >This translates to "you mustn't modify the part of the source code >that prints 'RMK rulez'". That could be in conflict with the DFSG if >you're picky Yes, in my view this definitely makes the code non-free. If we can't get the terms of the licence changed I don't think we should distribute it. p.
