I don't think it would satisfy FSF's standards for a free software license not OSI's standards for an open source license. OTOH, I think license cannot differentiate between classes of users to satisfy FSF, OSI, Debian etc. I remember there was a discussion about a license that proscribed you cannot use software for weapons development; since it talked about how the software may or may not be USED (GPL deals with distribution, as do most other OSI-approved licenses) and discriminated, I think people deemed it non-free.
I personally find no fault with IntarS license -- everyone has to, at the very least, eat. So, the text is probably fine (IANAL). Only, it doesn't seem to be an open source license so it should probably not be called one; it's more of a proprietary license where you happen to be able to see the code and redistribute it. Do you offer IntarS as SaaS? If not, that may be a good way to get people to discover it, pay for it and yet not be restricted. On 17. 9. 2013., at 23:45, Pirmin Braun <p...@intars.de> wrote: > we plan to license the upcoming IntarS 7 under this license. > What do you think about it? > > > -- > Pirmin Braun - IntarS Unternehmenssoftware GmbH - Am Hofbräuhaus 1 - 96450 > Coburg > +49 2642 40526292 +49 174 9747584 - skype:pirminb www.intars.de > p...@intars.de > Geschäftsführer: Pirmin Braun, Ralf Engelhardt Registergericht: Amtsgericht > Coburg HRB3136 > <license.txt> > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnustep mailing list > Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep