Simon McVittie <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 at 07:32:33 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Ken Arromdee: > > > Unlike the original BSD 4 clause license this adds "or software > > > that uses this software". > > > > Is it really that much different in effect from the Affero GPL? It > > may be a bit more far-reaching, but compliance is so much easier. > > The AGPL requires you to provide (an opportunity to download) > Corresponding Source in the webapp itself, but this license > "contaminates" web pages that merely *refer to* the webapp; I think > that's considerably more onerous.
Which highlights another problem with this license's wording: the nefarious word “use”. It's wholly unclear what set of actions “use this software” is intended to refer to; it certainly isn't consistently applied in license texts. So without enumeration of the actions permitted or forbidden, it's impossible to know whether the work is free software. -- \ “Some forms of reality are so horrible we refuse to face them, | `\ unless we are trapped into it by comedy. To label any subject | _o__) unsuitable for comedy is to admit defeat.” —Peter Sellers | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
