On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:26:55PM +0100, Bjoern wrote: > i have read that graphviz is licensed under the Common Public License > Version 1.0 [1]. The FSF consider this license as free and also in the > debian-legal mailing-list archive i couldn't find a statement that debian > have a different view. > So why this package is in non-free?
I don't know if there are two "graphviz" programs, if it's dual-licensed, or what; but the license examined previously [1] is very non-free [2]. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/02/msg00399.html [2] http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/graphviz/license/index.html > [1] http://www.graphviz.org/License.php "Therefore, if a Contributor includes the Program in a commercial product offering, such Contributor ("Commercial Contributor") hereby agrees to defend and indemnify every other Contributor ("Indemnified Contributor") against any losses, damages and costs (collectively "Losses") arising from claims, lawsuits and other legal actions brought by a third party against the Indemnified Contributor to the extent caused by the acts or omissions of such Commercial Contributor in connection with its distribution of the Program in a commercial product offering." This is questionable. I modify your work, removing a feature that somebody likes, and sell it. That somebody, as a result ("caused by the act") of me removing that feature in my redistribution, decides to sue you for allowing me to do so. It's a frivelous lawsuit, of course, and you'd probably win, but it may cost you money--but I don't think a license that requires me to pay your legal fees in this case is free. (You might get the money back from a countersuit, of course, but you might not--and if you have this option available, you might just elect to make me pay for it all instead of going back to court.) I seem to recall this issue being raised with this or some similar license, but I can't find it. -- Glenn Maynard