Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> A: No, credits describe the contribution made to a project. Ads >> describe a product someone wants you to buy. Ads are not the same as >> credits, and their preservation is not protected by this license. > > Debian's going to have to look really, really closely at every release > of every piece of software under this license, then, and risk an > argument -- in a courtroom -- with a copyright holder who considers > some line to be a credit, or insufficiently prominent in its modified > form. Fuzzy lines in a license are not a new thing. Debian isn't in the litigation business, so we're not going to be trying to push the boundaries anyway. Respecting the wishes of the author/licensor is a policy of ours -- remember the pine business. >> Q: What in this license prevents persons from making their name >> display excessively annoyingly throughout the running of the program? >> Isn't that a flaw in the license? >> >> A: The shovel doesn't stop the digger from creating a pit in the road >> that endangers other people. The license is a tool. Whether you make >> an ass out of yourself using it on the software you write is up to >> you. No compiler makes broken programs work.... > > In other words, some works under this license are free (for example, > one containing no credits but the copyright notice) and others are > non-free. Wouldn't such a work still be non-free? At the least, it definitely goes much farther than the analogous clause in the GPL. You can't include code (even optionally executed code) to suppress it, for example. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
