On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 22:21:01 +0100 Alex Mestiashvili wrote:

> Thank you all for such a detailed answers!

You're welcome!

> I found the following in the FAQ[0]:
> 3.2. Is InChI open?
> It is intended that the source code is freely re-usable and a license
> has been developed to reflect that. Since the InChI source code has a
> normative role (i.e. it acts as the final arbiter of the correctness) it
> is not freely modifiable, although it is open to anybody to view and
> build an InChI binary.

The answer for this FAQ does not seem to be factually correct.

The license we are talking about allows modifications (see its section
2) and also allows the licensee to apply the terms of the GNU GPL v2 or
later (see section 3), which, in its turn, allows modifications...

I am puzzled.

> To my limited understanding this render the software non-free as it
> fails for example the desert island test, though it is understandable
> why they require the code to be not-modifiable.
> Or am I missing the point?

A work which is not modifiable fails to meet DFSG#3 and is therefore
utterly non-free.
However, as I said, the license under consideration does not seem to
forbid modifications, as far as I can see...

 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

Attachment: pgplTScIm_0If.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to