I've been following the discussion, and it looks like wpoison, if determined free, will have the dubious distinction of being the first program in main (that I know of) with a clickwrap license that attempts to control use. (namely, it requires every user [0] to display the wpoison logo and link to the wpoison web page from their site [1])
Oddly enough, though, I can't find a clause in the DFSG excluding this sort of license. I'm somewhat surprised, actually; maybe it's just because clickwrap licenses tend to be so onerous that they fail one of the other points anyway. I'm not a lawyer, though, so I'll butt out now. Maybe you should ask debian-legal? Daniel [0] and, apparently, every website which "makes reference to this software"; I guess I'm causing lists.debian.org to violate wpoison's license with this message? That sounds like nonsense to me.. [1] the intent seems to be something like the clauses that require credit to the original authors to be given in derivatives; is there any way you could twist a website using wpoison into being a derivative work? -- /-------------------- Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -------------------\ | Fate always wins... | | at least, when people stick to the rules. | | -- Terry Pratchett, _Interesting Times_ | \------- (if (not (understand-this)) (go-to http://www.schemers.org)) --------/