On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:37:30AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit : > > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 08:21:47AM -0700, tony mancill wrote: > > > 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software > > > must display the following acknowledgement: > > > This product includes software developed by Endace Technology Ltd., > > > Hamilton, New Zealand, and its contributors. > > > 4. Neither the name of Endace Technology nor the names of its > > > contributors > > > may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software > > > without specific prior written permission. > > > > This is exactly the wording of the 4-clause BSD license, with just the name > > of UC Berkeley replaced with Endace. It's thus DFSG-free, even though it's > > strongly discouraged. > > Last week-end I was told by a DD that the 4-clause BSD licence was > non-free... Do you have any link in the archives which proves the > contrary? This is very interesting for me as I am interested in bringing > to Debian an unofficial package whose software is under this licence...
I have a very urgent piece of work to do, so I won't dig the archives right now, but for example, openssl uses these words and is in main (although not GPL-compatible). Out of the top of my brain, http://fsf.org/licenses/, although it's a non-Debian source. I really dislike this license, it is dangerously close to the Gnon-FDL in this regard, but at least I don't see the right for unharassed advertising to be a fundamental freedom. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
