On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:13:06 -0500 Glenn Maynard wrote: > Overall, I don't see any strong feeling on this list that this license > is non-free, and that's a reasonable rationale for closing these bugs.
If you think this license is *not* non-free, could you please explain me
why you consider the overreaching super-name-change clause as
acceptable?
I would be happy to find out that PHP is already DFSG-free, after all:
so, please, persuade me...
The clause under discussion is:
| 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
| may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
| from [EMAIL PROTECTED] You may indicate that your software works in
| conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
| it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
As a reminder, I see this clause as non-free because it starts as a
name-change clause, but then goes beyond and forbids an entire class of
names for derived works (any name having "PHP" as a substring, minus
some exceptions).
This is overreaching, IMO, and makes the clause non-free, even when
applied to PHP itself.
It gets even worse when applied to anything that is not PHP itself.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......................................................................
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpYTnRA0DPCI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
