On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Some artists unhappy with the wording of the (L)GPL are looking for free > art licenses, with or without copyleft. What would your recommendations > for such licenses be? The BSD or Artistic licenses look fine for the > latter case, but how about the former?
I'd actually suggest the MIT license instead of the 1,2,4 clause BSD, and would question why people haev a problem with the GPL; there's really no reason not to distribute a copyleft work under the GPL if you actually want the freedom protection that a copyleft license gives. Basically, if the source code terms of the GPL cannot be satisfied, Debian won't distribute it either, because the work does not have source. Don Armstrong -- Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did, we'd be running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and listening to repetitive music. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]