On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Jeff Licquia wrote: > The filename limitations are now optional; 5.a.1 is one possibility of > three. As for 5.a.2 and the programmatic identification strings, can > you elaborate? Considering that much of the wording in the license is > mine (including 5.a.2), it's entirely possible that the parts you object > to are because of my poor wording and are not a fundamental difference.
5.a.1 restricts filenames (worse, filenames which are part of an API). 5.a.2 Prevents modifications on certain systems (those using a validating Base Format). 5.a.3 doesn't apply without an additional grant of permission from somewhere else. None of these alternatives describe free software. I take your point about 5b - if this is intended to refer to non-api strings like copyright information and such that may be spit out, I have no objection. I'm still a bit uncomfortable with this, as I recall from the previous discussion something about using these strings to validate modules. You might consider GPL-like wording for this. -- Mark Rafn [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.dagon.net/>