On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 09:59:36AM -0600, Eric Sherrill wrote: > Clause 5. fails DFSG 5. (discrimination against persons), clause 8. is a > noxious termination clause (but not specifically DFSG-unfree, see e.g. > Apple's "open" license), and clause 9. is an even more noxious choice of law > clause (Virginia == UCITA == blech). I'd recommend somebody undertake a > "clean-room" rewrite of the parser module & license it with GPL or LGPL just > to be safe.
Note that this Pisces license (http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1007) is quite similar to the Python 1.6 CNRI license (http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1012). No surprise, since both licenses originate at CNRI (the Pisces author Jeremy Hylton has left CNRI with Python's author Guido van Rossum. Both now work for Digital Creations). Perhaps you remember the discussions about the Python CNRI license. The first revisions of the Python CNRI license draft were modified to comply with the Open Source Definition, which they now do (at least that was the conclusion of the discussion). My guess is that the Pisces license is more or less identical to the first drafts of the Python CNRI license. There should be a chance to talk to CNRI and ask if they would agree to use their Python 1.6 CNRI Open Source license for Pisces as well. Clause 5 and 8 of the Pisces license are absent in the Python CNRI license. The remaining problem with the Python CNRI license is that it's considered incompatible with the GPL, since it still has this choice of law clause (clause 9; it's clause 7 in the Python CNRI license). Still, according to Bruce Perens (who had some consultation with CNRI about the modifications of the license), this clause seems to be compatible with the DFSG. Conclusion: If somebody could persuade CNRI to release Pisces under the Python CNRI Open Source license, Pisces could go into main. Still, it would not be compatible with the GPL. That's a problem, since web2ldap is under the GPL. We would be on the safe side and could distribute web2ldap though, if the author of web2ldap choose to include an exception clause in his license that explicitely permits usage of his code with code under this CNRI license. Same situation as with KDE and Qt (before Qt2 was released under the GPL). Note that all authors of GPL code involved had to agree, though. Gregor
