Comments below refer to the DFSG at http://www.debian.org/social_contract.
Rene Mayrhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ********************************************************************** THIS SOFTWARE CONTAINS CONCEPTS AND TECHNIQUES THAT ARE PATENT PENDING ********************************************************************** Patent infringement will make the software non-free. [...] All software, papers, and other works of information are being licensed for use as laid out in the terms of this agreement and remain the property and copyright of the author except where noted otherwise. These works may not to be used in part or in whole of a commercial product offering without express written consent from the author. Violates DFSG #6. Making commercial products is a field of endeavor. Permission is granted to modify source code for personal use only. DISTRIBUTION OF MODIFIED SOURCE CODE WITHOUT THE AUTHOR'S PERMISSION IS PROHIBITED. Violates DFSG #3 and #4. Distribution All distributed software, papers, and other works are free to use by any individual, organization, or commercial venture as long as the above conditions are agreed to. This software may be included with any freely distributed Operating System provided it is not sold separately or as part of a "security bundle" or similar packaging. Violates DFSG #1. Making a "security bundle" is a form of aggregation. Scope This disclaimer supercedes all previous licensing/disclaimers either oral or written. Direct any questions to the author. `supersedes' is misspelled. [...] ----------------------------------------------- And here the written statement from the autor (it was a reply to some questions I mailed him - anything that does not have to do with the license has been cut out): > I am planning to make > Debian Linux packages of them (Sentry, Logcheck). However, the license was not > clear to me. Do you allow packages to be made, including the minor > modifications on scripts and Makefiles to make them work with Debian ? The point of the license is really to prevent unauthorized modifications to the source that I'm not aware of. Because they are security tools I need to be very careful about what changes are made to them so no holes are introduced. I don't have a problem with packages being made, I'll even put links to them on the web pages. This doesn't address most of the points above. > Also I am building a Linux based firewall (actually, a secured distribution > based on Debian - it will be distributed under the GPL) and I am not sure if > you allow your tools to be included in such a package. <snip> I would allow for this as long as you aren't selling a "Linux security package" or similar bundle that is based solely on my tools. I want to avoid people charging money for my tools (which are free). If you are using them as part of a free distribution I wouldn't have a problem with you using the tools at all. Still in violation of DFSG #1. <snip> Thanks, let me know if you have any other questions. You can see I'm not that strict, I just want to avoid unauthorized modifications and people selling the tools directly. [...] This will have to go to non-free. -- "MONO - Monochrome Emulation This field is used to store your favorite bit." --FreeVGA Attribute Controller Reference
