On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 03:10:35PM -0400, Joe Drew wrote: > On Mon, 2003-08-25 at 14:26, Branden Robinson wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 09:03:13AM -0400, Joe Drew wrote: > > > On Sun, 2003-08-24 at 17:03, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 11:39:51AM -0700, Jeff Bailey wrote: > > > > > We also have essentially the same license with ttf-bitstream-vera. > > > > > > > > IMO, that isn't Free Software, either. > > > > > > There are no practical restrictions on its freedom; I fail to see how it > > > isn't free software. > > > > Sure there are. If my neighbor asks me for a copy of it, I burn it to a > > CD-R, and ask him for a quarter to recoup the cost of the blank CD-R, > > I've just violated the license. > > That's why you include on the CD the following shell script, echo.sh: > > #!/bin/sh > echo $* > > Then you are selling echo.sh plus bitstream vera fonts, which is not a > violation of the license.
This is not different in principle from requiring me to include a licensed adjunct piece of code. What if that adjunct is under the GNU GPL? How about the Sun RPC license? How about the Microsoft EULA? I stand by my claim that such a requirement is unfree. I don't particularly care if you don't feel it's onerous enough to matter. A USD 0.0001 tax (one-hundreth of one cent) payable to Bitstream for each copy of Bitstream Vera so distributed wouldn't be regarded as "onerous" by most courts, either. -- G. Branden Robinson | Build a fire for a man, and he'll Debian GNU/Linux | be warm for a day. Set a man on [EMAIL PROTECTED] | fire, and he'll be warm for the http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett
pgp0vmMt9KBTt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
