On 11-Dec-2001 David Coe wrote: > Upstream ispell 3.2.x has made the following change in its copyright > (compared to 3.1.20, which we currently distribute). > > This sounds nonfree to me; am I wrong? If he were to change that > "must" to a "should," would it then be DFSG-compliant? If not, what > changes would you suggest? >
nah, this is just a stronger version of the apache advert clause it seems. Debian is exempt as are most people who would actually use and ship ispell (word processors, mail clients, etc).
