On Sunday, October 12, 2025 6:57:33 AM Mountain Standard Time Francesco Poli wrote: > On Wed, 08 Oct 2025 21:33:53 -0700 Soren Stoutner wrote: > > [...] > > > The text from the license which caused me concern was: > > > > "any of its associated files that was generated in *any approach*” > > > > Is a file generated by a user using the binary an "associated file”? That > > isn’t language that is common in other licenses, so, as far as I know, there > > isn’t a standard, industry-wide acceptance of what those terms mean. I > > agree > > that if the meaning of this were cleared up my concerns could be > > ameliorated. > > > > I agree with you that even if they did intend this, it would probably still > > be DFSG-free > > [...] > > Wouldn't this be a restriction on the use of the binary (if the > intended interpretation of the license text were indeed that a file > generated by a user using the binary is an "associated file”)? > > Restrictions on use are generally regarded as DFSG-non-free...
It isn’t a restriction on use (at least as far as I read it). It is simply a requirement to distribute attribution. -- Soren Stoutner [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
