These are really important projects that claim to be free in the sense of freedom. But I'd like to know, what Free Software Foundation and readers of debian-legal think about those licences. So, please, evaluate those licences carefully
And I hope, that then FSF can make some statements about those licences in this WWW-page: http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html * * * http://creativecommons.org/ This is a bunch of licences. It is possible to choose one after answering some questions in WWW-forms: http://creativecommons.org/license/ Complete list of licences is here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ It is very easy to say, that at least some of those licences are not compatible with Debian Free Software Guidelines and Open Source Definition: All NoDerivs- and NonCommercial-licenses. What is left after ignoring them, are these two licences: "Attribution" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0 "ShareAlike" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0 "Attribution-ShareAlike" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0 So, concentrate on them, first. * * * https://www.helixcommunity.org/ Helix DNA is multi-licenced software project. One of those licences is meant to be compatible with Open Source Definition. https://www.helixcommunity.org/content/licenses https://www.helixcommunity.org/content/rpsl Open Source Initiative has already accepted it: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/real.php This question still remains: Can I listen and watch to RealAudio- and RealVideo-files with completely free software, if I install only RPSL-licenced software from Helix DNA? BTW who want to create Debian-package of Helix DNA? -- Juhapekka "naula" Tolvanen * University of Jyväskylä * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~juhtolv/index.html * * "STRAIGHT BUT NOT NARROW!!" "Yksin talon pimeydessä istuu valtaistuimellaan lapsi silmin lasittunein. Itkee sähkön valtamereen." CMX
