On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 11:28:54AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 07:17:46PM -0500, Aubin Paul wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I'd like to package this utility which I've found quite useful, > > anyway, there were some questions that I raised regarding the license, > > which states: > > "not modified in any way, and it is not sold for profit." > > > > The author has clarified somewhat below, but I don't know if this is > > enough to get into main... > > We will only know when we see the revised license terms. > > But judging from his intentions: > > > I see what you mean. I will revise that with the next release. Selling a > > CD-ROM or a distribution with rpl on it is fine. I just don't want someone > > coming along and saying "Buy rpl for $19.95" or anything like that. If > > your legal folks need that revised I can do so sooner rather than later. > > If that is what he is going to do (expempting distributions, and not > allowing just to sell rpl), it will be non-free. Except if he is very > careful with wording it (see the Artistic License, "Reasonable copying > fee").
The Clarified Artistic license is better (in this and other ways). It s/Reasonable Copying/Distribution fee/ and other things.. obligatory opinion: it's always nicer if people just use existing licenses.. makes life easier.. -- Brian Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian/GNU Linux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.org LPSG "member" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.lpsg.org -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
