In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Igor Grobman writes: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> igor wrote: > >a new license yet, but here it is: >> > >> >/* ===================================================================== >> > * Copyright (c) 1998 Moxa Technologies Corp, LTD. All rights reserved. >> [...] >> > * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this >> > * software must display the following acknowledgment: >> > * "This product includes software developed by the Moxa Technologies >> > * Corp, LTD. for use in the Moxa RADIUS Server (http://www.moxa.com/)." >> >> Urk! It's the Obnoxious BSD Advertising Clause, back to haunt us. >> >> Including the OBSDAC would make Moxa non-free. Please educate them ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ My mistake; I didn't reread the DFSG before posting. Sorry for the FUD.
>> about that, too, and suggest they use an XFree86-like licence rather >> than this BSD-like one. > >I don't understand. We haven't declared all BSD software non-free yet, have >we? How come moxa doesn't fit the bill. It has the exact same clause. I >seem to remember a long discussion on -devel, but didn't we conclude that this > >BSD clause doesn't make software non-free? > >Anyway, could you explain to me how this advertising clause is so harmful? I don't remember any prior discussion of this on debian-devel -- so it was probably before I joined Debian... For the full rant, you should probably read RMS's recent article in gnu.misc.discuss; subject "What's Wrong with the BSD License", message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The gist is this: most of the "obnoxious" advertising clauses in BSD-ish software specify a different sentence which must be mentioned on advertising mentioning the software. This means that if I build a distribution with lots of BSD software in it, there are likely to be a lot of different sentences I must include on my advertisements (or I must restrict myself as to how many features I mention in any one advertisement, so as to reduce the number of sentences I must include). RMS says he counted 75 different sentences in one of the BSD distributions. I've just looked over the DFSG again, and I can't see any restriction against using an Obnoxious BSD Advertising Clause, so its presence does not make the software non-free. Sorry for spreading FUD. However, I think if you can, you should try to get the licence changed to be more XFree86-ish and less BSD-ish, and thus help prevent the problem spreading. -- Charles Briscoe-Smith White pages entry, with PGP key: <URL:http://alethea.ukc.ac.uk/wp?95cpb4> PGP public keyprint: 74 68 AB 2E 1C 60 22 94 B8 21 2D 01 DE 66 13 E2 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
