On Tue, 09 May 2000, Brian Ristuccia wrote: > This is similar to the Apple notification clause. If Anonymizer Inc. goes > out of business or decides to take down their mail server you can no longer > satisfy this term and thus can't modify the software at all. Notification > clauses have been argued to violate DFSG #1, #3, #5, and #7. I suspect > almost all of these arguments are valid. > > (Note that it would be fine if it read something like "you may modify and > distribute the source only iff you provide everyone who recieves a copy of > the software and/or your modifications a perpetual, royalty-free license to > use and distribute")
Thanks to everybody for confirming my view of things. I will check out
the differencies between the 2.0.x and the 3.x features more closly
and contact Anonymizer Inc. asking whether they would consider a
license change if it turns out to be worth the hassle.
yours,
peter
--
PGP encrypted messages prefered.
http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~ppalfrad/
pgpsFAb0gH9gQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
