Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > The problems concerning QPL 3 remain, > > Not so great. > > > but consensus about it has been much more dubious, > > I haven't seen anyone seriously dispute my analysis in > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/07/msg01705.html
I'm not convinced that QPL 3 makes it non-free. Of course I don't like QPL 3, so don't expect me to spend much time arguing for it, but I have mentioned it a few times. For example: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/07/msg01315.html I don't see a clear qualitative distinction between the licensing required by QPL 3 and the licensing required by the GPL, for example, that makes one a "fee" but not the other.
