Forrest J. Cavalier III writes: > Such clauses are not clear OSD conflicts because there are already > OSI approved licenses with similar clauses. > > The GPL 2c requires a run-time note under certain conditions.
Hrm. I think that the GPL was simply acclaimed as an Open Source license. I'm not sure it actually qualifies as such, now that I see this note. OSD#3 says that the license must allow modifications. We have always interpreted that to mean that the license may not disallow modifications. We have never removed OSI approval for any license, so I'm sure that the GPL is in no danger of not being an Open Source license. However, I'll take a good hard look at any license which doesn't permit any and all modifications to a program. > The OSI-approved the W3C license which has a requirement of > displaying a notice to users. If it's in the documentation, such a notice is displayed. It says nothing about that notice having to be displayed by the software itself, whereas the GPLv2 specifically says that the program must display the message. -- -russ nelson http://russnelson.com | Crypto without a threat Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | model is like cookies 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | without milk. Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
