L. V. Lammert wrote:

>On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, David Dooling wrote:
>
>  
>
>>pine is not free software.  It's license does not allow the
>>distribution of modified binaries.  I would recommend mutt.
>>
>>    
>>
>Sorry, but Pine is BSD licensed:
>
>"Use of Pine/Pico/Pilot: You may compile and execute these programs for
>any purpose, including commercial, without paying anything to the
>University of Washington, provided that the legal notices are maintained
>intact and honored."
>
>It is freely available on BSD and other systems.
>
>       Lee
>
>================================================
>  Leland V. Lammert            [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>    Chief Scientist     Omnitec Corporation
> Network/Internet Consultants   www.omnitec.net
>================================================
> 
>_______________________________________________
>CWE-LUG mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://www.cwelug.org/
>http://www.cwelug.org/archives/
>http://www.cwelug.org/mailinglist/
>
>  
>
The FAQ explains, in more detail, the restriction on derivative works 
from Pine.

http://www.washington.edu/pine/faq/legal.html


      "10.1 Is Pine Open Source?"

"It depends on how that term is defined. Source for Unix Pine is 
provided to allow users and system administrators to customize and adapt 
Pine for their own requirements. UW's Pine license 
<http://www.washington.edu/pine/overview/legal.html> allows anyone to 
download source code for Unix Pine and make modifications for their own 
local use without asking permission. Anyone can also create and 
distribute patch files to implement bug fixes or minor enhancements 
without asking permission. However, redistribution of a modified version 
of Pine requires explicit permission from the University of Washington."

"10.2 Weren't earlier Pine licenses less restrictive regarding 
redistribution of modified versions?"

"No. License <http://www.washington.edu/pine/overview/legal.html> 
wording has changed from time to time, but the owner's intent has not. 
When it was discovered that some individuals were misinterpreting the 
intent of the University, the license wording was clarified.

In particular, the earliest Pine licenses included the words: 
"Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software... is 
hereby granted," but some people tried to pervert the meaning of that 
sentence to define "this software" to include derivative works of "this 
software". The intent has always been that you can re-distribute the UW 
distribution, but if you modify it, you have created a derivative work 
and must ask permission to redistribute it. There has never been 
implicit or explicit permission given to redistribute modified or 
derivative versions without permission. The license wording was 
therefore changed to clarify this point."


-- 
Jerry Hubbard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 
_______________________________________________
CWE-LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cwelug.org/
http://www.cwelug.org/archives/
http://www.cwelug.org/mailinglist/

Reply via email to