On 17/07/07, Troy A. Griffitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, because we have to answer the support emails, e.g. "I purchases your > software and it doesn't work" from many unfortunate ThinkAll consumers. > Though I agree with Chris that we likely only want to add restrictions to > BibleCS if do decide to go that route. > > Eeli Kaikkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Chris Little wrote: > >> Whether the license would still result in free software would depend on > >> the actual license terms. Of the three examples I listed, only the > >> second, if written as an explicit prohibition on the "freedom" to embed > >> adware, would result in non-free software. The others are entirely > >> permissible in free software, at least as defined by Debian. > >> > >> I think I'd also add a requirement that distributors notify users that > >> the software is free and include attribution and a link to CrossWire. > > > >These terms (except the second one), or something like these, seem to be > >possible under GPL 3 (see section 7). I strongly advice against anything > >which is incompatible with GPL.
It might be a good idea to dual-license the library - under the GPL (whichever version), and under the specific 'anti-thinkall' licence. Then BibleCS could be released only under the 'anti-thinkall' license. And the other frontends could continue to be GPL. Regards, Daniel (who is catching up slowly on the list) _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
