On Tue, 04 Mar 2003, Glenn Maynard wrote: > Does this mean that you can do these things without paying a fee to > upstream, or that you can only do these things if you don't charge a > fee for doing so?
As far as I can tell, the license isn't clear as to what is being done
'without fee'. All of the similar "free" licenses I could find include
selling as the list of permisions, which make it obvious that the
'without fee' means the original grant of permision is made without
payment expected.
However, if we could get upstream to weigh in on this and/or clarify,
it would be good.
> This seems to be the same as the 3-clause BSD license's third clause.
> I believe negative advertising clauses are always OK.
3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote
products derived from this software without specific prior
written permission.
It's slightly different because it talks about advertising and
promotion versus endorsement or promotion of products. [Ie, it
seemingly restricts being able to list the upstream author in
connection with the original piece of software.]
I don't think this should cause a problem for Debian unless upstream
views this clause as making us unable to identify upstream in
copyright files and on the web.
Don Armstrong
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
pgp0RPbYbifc8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
