On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 07:31:51PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 12:00:03AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > I'd like to append something like the following: > > > > The license may not place further constraints on the naming or > > labelling of the derivative work. This includes specifying the form of > > such notices, or the manner in which derivative works must be named. > > /usr/share/doc/apache/copyright > > 5. Products derived from this software may not be called "Apache", > nor may "Apache" appear in their name, without prior written > permission of the Apache Software Foundation.
Bletch. Still, no "derived works must have NMU versions" clauses. > > > N. Acknowledgements in documentation > > > > > The license for a free program may require that end-user > > > documentation which accompanies the program contains a short > > > acknowledgement that credits the author. > > > > That's horrible. This could mean that we have to include the blasted > > things in the release notes. Survey of licenses and a tighter > > restriction before we write this one in, please. I'm not sufficiently > > familiar with such clauses to be able to pull one out of the air. > > /usr/share/doc/apache/copyright > > 3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, > if any, must include the following acknowledgment: > "This product includes software developed by the > Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/)." > Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself, > if and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear. We're invoking the second part of this across the board. The first one alone would not be free; fortunately it is a disjunction, allowing us to ignore the first part. Hell, the first part would probably fail DFSG #9 (contamination). -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
