On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 9:48 AM, David Woolley <[email protected]> wrote: >> It is LGPL v3 + "Additionally, YOU CAN'T REMOVE ANY TCPDF COPYRIGHT >> NOTICE OR LINK FROM THE GENERATED PDF DOCUMENTS." >> http://www.tcpdf.org/license.php >> >> What do you think? >> > > I'd say the licence was void as it attempts to impose an additional > restriction. I would not use it.
It depends. If someone created this software themselves, they can of course use any license they can think of. So saying "our license is like LGPLv3 with this one additionally silly requirement" is in itself valid. From this it follows that: - it is not LGPL, it is a different license - it is therefore not an OSI certified open source license - it is possibly not an open source license at all, this is probably the case here - Since it is not LGPL, it is in any case incompatible with basically all other (L)GPL code out there. So it is not open souce in the sense that you could easily take code from this project to another LGPL project and vice versa, it becomes a very isolated creature, open source or not. In summary, some times such additional clauses can work and the software will still be open source, but generally these are a bad idea. henrik -- [email protected] +358-40-8211286 skype: henrik.ingo irc: hingo www.openlife.cc My LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=9522559 _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
