Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It also has more disadvantages. Thinking it over, I can't figure out > under which license I may and/or must distribute a derivative work which > I created and renamed. If csplain were under GPL, it's clear: It must > be GPL. But it isn't under the GPL, and the license it is under doesn't > state clearly which license derivatives are supposed to use. > > I obviously can't use the same license text (because "same name > 'csplain'" would be self-contradictory). Am I obligded to replace > 'csplain" by my new name? Or am I allowed to drop it?
As David pointed out, you are not allowed by GPL to add any further restrictions. It is definitly unclear what license one has (and is allowed to) use for a derived work. I think this problem is also at the heart of RMS's comment on debian-legal where Thomas asked about this license. It is ok for a free software license to carry a renaming clause. But you cannot do this by adding restrictions on top of GPL. IMO this makes csplain etc non-free. cheerio ralf
