Follow-up Comment #5, task #7734 (project administration): > IANAL, but you aren't one either.
... but I did take the time to discuss this with the FSF licensing team. > In fact, the licence text in use is exactly the same the > OpenBSD project uses for newer code. That would mean that this > detail makes the new OpenBSD source non-free, too. Authors' intent is important, and the Pine authors clearly showed an intent to make the license non-free. This, added to the latent ambiguity, is primarily what made it non-free. > Sorry, but this is just a bit too ridiculous - I didn't write > this library to have legal problems by releasing it freely and > non-closed. Furthermore the license in use has far less > restrictions than the GPL or LGPL... And yeah, in order to > avoid any kind of license problem I did even take 2 minutes to > paste the license text into every single file in the release. > > I'm not out for blood, and I'm taking this seriously, but hey, > I enjoy doing a free release, and I'm sure that if you find a > lawyer that wants to find a problem in the ISC license, he will > find one for > sure... (e.g. http://bsd.slashdot.org/bsd/07/01/15/1757235.shtml) Geez, we just suggested to add "/or" somewhere in your license because it caused troubles in the past.. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?7734> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
