Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> writes: > Permission is hereby given for the use, distribution and > modification of this software subject to the following. > * You must include this copyright notice with all distributed > copies of this software, including modified copies. > * You must clearly mark modified versions of this software > as differing from the original.
This is (as the OP says) a roll-your-own license text, not really matching any widely-understood license text. The conditions seem to be aiming for a more limited derivative of the Apache License: only the conditions of attribution, and notification that a work is modified from the original. Neither of those restrictions is a problem for software freedom under the DFSG. One significant lack is that the permissions do not include explicit permission for a recipient to license the work to third parties under the same conditions. This fails DFSG §3. So I think this work is not free software by the DFSG. The copyright holder would be well advised to choose an already widely-understood free-software license text, and grant recipients freedom under that license. For the apparent intent of the copyright holder, I would recommend they should grant recipients of the work the Apache License 2.0 <URL:https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt> by following the “How to apply the license to your work” instructions. -- \ “Leave nothing to chance. Overlook nothing. Combine | `\ contradictory observations. Allow yourself enough time.” | _o__) —Hippocrates | Ben Finney