Hello legal, So I stumbled upon this rather interesting case of a software licensed by GPL2 but with an extra "clause" to it: " # If you enclose this script or parts of it in your software, it has to # be accompanied by the same license (see link) and the place where to get # the recent version of this program. Do not violate the license and if # you do not agree to all of these terms, do not use it in the first place. " https://github.com/drwetter/testssl.sh/blob/3b89dc6b0a41299fbf462789998e4c103f4f0210/testssl.sh#L19-L22
The release notes for 3.0. r5 also mentions: " This program is licensed under GPL-2. Please note also that if you're using the program for a paid or free public service you need mention where you got this program from. " It seems that the author is trying to prevent people from setting up webpages using this software as a backend without crediting it. It seems like a reasonable think to ask for. My question is regarding DFSG compliance around this, I believe there is nothing wrong with it, but the fact that upstream expose is as GPL-2 seems a little misleading, as it's not plain GPL-2 and I think we should change something in d/copyright to address this. Are you aware of other software that are in a similar situation? I would like to see what d/copyright looks like. For this case the package was accepted by ftp-master with a d/copyright that states it as GPL-2. Regards, -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
