Mariusz Przygodzki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is anybody can advise me if the OPL license >(http://www.opencontent.org/opl.shtml) is or isn't in compliance with DFSG?
Insofar as it makes sense to classify it under software guidelines, I believe it is. >I especially concerns about two following points: > >... > a) You must cause the modified content to carry prominent notices > stating that you changed it, the exact nature and content of the > changes, and the date of any change. No problem. It's a lot less restrictive than some of the things that DFSG 4 allows. Note also that this is almost exactly the same clause as GPL 2(a). > b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in > whole or in part contains or is derived from the OC or any part > thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties > under the terms of this License, unless otherwise permitted under > applicable Fair Use law. Obviously no problem. Think about what the GPL says, for example! -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
