On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 07:48:19AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 09:55:27PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > > "Must supply source" is allowed under DFSG#3, which says "under the same > > terms as the license of the original software". > > Which would allow 2a, 2b and 2c of the GPL as well.
No. "... must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software." 2a and 2c are restrictions on modification, not restriction, which that requirement has nothing to do with. > > > -- for the "can't add further restrictions" restriction -- simply by > > > incorporating code which was provided under a conflicting license). > > > > This is also a debate we've had already; we disagree on this. > > That was a debate on a different topic. > > That the effects can be achieved through re-engineering doesn't mean that > you're allowed to achieve those effects without that re-engineering. If you add further restrictions (such as by using code under a conflicting license", it's no longer "under the same terms as the license of the original software". It's under stricter terms. The second part of DFSG#3 allows this prohibition: it only requires that it be allowed under the same terms. (I've made this argument before, so the usual requests to not repeat ourselves apply, unless there's something new to say.) -- Glenn Maynard
