> You're advocating a position, then, that the PHP license can require > recipients to make false, and even nonsensical, claims, and that this is > not a problem to be addressed by improving the license terms.
I think that this is similar to the BSD licenses. Look at /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD. It specifically states: Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. >From this, it would seem that it is possible to use this license even if you are not the University. Why else would Debian keep this in /usr/share/common-licenses? > Is that the position of the PHP Group: that a requirement for the > recipient to make false claims is “absolutely no problem” of the > license? I don't think that the position of the PHP Group is that requiring the recipient to make false claims is "absolutely no problem"; the license works for *them*; it just doesn't work for anyone else who chooses to use their license >> When applied to software that is not available from *.php.net, the >> license terms may not be sensible, but they still can be followed. > > Is the fact they can't sensibly be followed not a problem to be > addressed by improving the license terms? It could be addressed by improving the licensing terms, but it isn't necessary, and the PHP Group seems very unwilling to do so. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53d88e86.3060...@bitmessage.ch
