Hi Marius, On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 00:13, Marius Bakke <mar...@gnu.org> wrote:
> > This is definitely not a consistent license for us. > > Having re-read the original text (without the annotations), the thing > that stands out is: > > Proprietary software companies wishing to use or incorporate Covered > Software within their programs must contact Licensor to purchase a > separate license. Open source developers who wish to incorporate parts > of Covered Software into free software with conflicting licenses may > write Licensor to request a waiver of terms. > > From <https://svn.nmap.org/nmap/LICENSE>. IANAL, it’s a weird way to "double" license; it’s fine since it’s GPLv2 too. > I'll see what licens...@fsf.org has to say first. For the record, the free GNU/linux distributions Parabola (listed here [1]) distributes "nmap": <https://www.parabola.nu/packages/?q=nmap> It will be interesting to know what FSF licensing will say. > PS: Licenses make terrible bed-side reading! Boring enough to want to sleep fast? ;-) All the best, simon