On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 01:34:22PM -0500, Stephen Ryan wrote: > Waitaminnit. Maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't the QPL a Free > Software license? I didn't do that much of a careful search, but I > googled for "QPL DFSG" and found a bunch of hits that make it look like > the QPL is considered Free. If so, then why shouldn't jpgraph go into > main? The "commercial" clause is no more obnoxious than a > GPL/talk-to-me dual license, as it applies only in the case of > closed-source use. > > What am I missing?
Is this the same license that was just discussed here? http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200212/msg00186.html It seems to disallow private modifications (6c), which, as I understand it, is a DFSG requirement. -- Glenn Maynard