Gunnar Wolf <gw...@debian.org> writes: > Soren Stoutner dijo [Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 03:08:22PM -0700]: >> 2. It requires that derivatives must use the same license. That isn’t a >> standard part of a MIT (Expat) license, but it is a standard part of other >> DFSG licenses (like the GPL), so I don’t think it would be a DFSG problem. > > So, this paragraph tries to make the MIT license into a Copyleft / Viral > licensing scheme. This is counter to what most people believe the main point > of > the MIT licenses to be! > > Maybe it is not against the DFSG, but it leads users to perform mind games > they > should not have to.
Instead of trying too hard to figure out exactly what the author really means, maybe you can contact them about dual-licensing it? I do not know if you can contact the original author, but I found a (hopefully) more up-to-date email at https://pp3.sourceforge.net/ My suggestion would be to ask them if they would dual license everything under the GPL-V3+, but any of the standard licenses would do. https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ Cheers, Walter Landry