On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 23:10 -0400, Nathan A. Stine wrote: > Or so I thought. > > Diego Biurrun marked it as non-free upstream, but I'd think Debian Legal > should take a look at the license to make their own determination.
Well, it's IMHO not non-free (as in not DFSG free) but it's definitely GPLv2 incompatible because of the restriction in the patent license (interesting here: if they didn't include a patent license nobody would've complained although they had no official rights to use the patents...). If your software is (L)GPLv2+ or v3 I guess everything is fine, if it's LGPLv2 it's probably fine too. But you're right, Debian Legal should probably look at it as well. I've already asked the ftp-masters to give their statement about the license and compatibility with other licenses but they didn't answer yet.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
