Brian Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > isn't this just the same Artistic license as Perl, etc is released > under? > > looks like it (i just skimmed), in which case it's DFSG-free.
Could the owners be persuaded to licence their program under the disjunction of the Artistic license and the GPL? This is how Perl is licensed. Even though the Artistic licence is itself (I think) GPL-compatible, it's good to have the GPL as an explicit option, because then people can tell immediately, and without consulting a lawyer, that Perl's licence is GPL-compatible, and it can never be disputed in the future. If you haven't already done so, read this: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#ArtisticLicense Edmund
