On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Raul Miller wrote: >On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 07:16:08PM -0600, John Galt wrote: >> No, it requires releasability under the SAME license. Clause 5 >> requires modifications to be released with NO restrictions at all, >> and all licenses necessarily restrict rights, including the OpenPBS >> license. Therefore modifications cannot be released under the OpenPBS >> license. > >I agree that the OpenPBS license requires modifications to be public >domain. > >However, I don't see how this conflicts with DFSG. DFSG says: > ><quote> > 3. Derived Works > > The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow > them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the > original software. ></quote> > >And, public domain works can be distributed under the OpenPBS license.
You're the second one to say that the second half of DFSG 3 is irrelevant in this case. This solves one of my problems. The second is more thorny. It seems that the PBS license has the choice of law clause for Virginia, a UCTIA state. In the past, this was enough to make a license questionable. Is it enough reason to make it non-free on it's own? Remember, the choice of law thing actually makes a weird sort of sense, as it IS a click-wrap license, and UCTIA gives a click-wrap the force of law. >Thanks, > > -- The early worm gets the bird. Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
