Question about the Vovida licence
When looking at the opensource.org page, I discovered that the Vovida Licence (http://www.vovida.org/licence.html) is considered as OSD compliant. However, the fourth clause tells that 4. Products derived from this software may not be called VOCAL, nor may VOCAL appear in their name, without prior written permission. Is this compatible with the third clause of the DFSG ? It looks like a restriction on the distribution. BTW, it looks like a DJB-like clause but DJB software are not OSD compliant. Thanks. -- Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Debian Activity Page: http://jerome.marant.free.fr/debian ---
Re: Question about the Vovida licence
On Fri, Jan 26, 2001, Jérôme Marant wrote: 4. Products derived from this software may not be called VOCAL, nor may VOCAL appear in their name, without prior written permission. Is this compatible with the third clause of the DFSG ? It looks like a restriction on the distribution. It's DFSG-compliant ; see the Apache License for instance, section #5 is exactly the same. -- Sam.
Re: Question about the Vovida licence
jerome.marant said: When looking at the opensource.org page, I discovered that the Vovida Licence (http://www.vovida.org/licence.html) is considered as OSD compliant. However, the fourth clause tells that 4. Products derived from this software may not be called VOCAL, nor may VOCAL appear in their name, without prior written permission. Is this compatible with the third clause of the DFSG ? It looks like a restriction on the distribution. Not really. You can still redistribute, you just can't use VOCAL name. Think of it as a branding thing - to get the certification as the official one, you need permission. Since Linux owns the Linux trademark, he could rightly prevent anyone from calling their distro Linux, but he couldn't stop them from distributing it under another name. jeff
