Re: MIT +no-false-attribs
Jérémy Lal je...@edagames.com following npm license is Expat + one restriction, is it still DFSG ? If it just this one addition: Distributions of all or part of the Software intended to be used by the recipients as they would use the unmodified Software, containing modifications that substantially alter, remove, or disable functionality of the Software, outside of the documented configuration mechanisms provided by the Software, shall be modified such that the Author's bug reporting email addresses and urls are either replaced with the contact information of the parties responsible for the changes, or removed entirely. Then I feel that would be acceptable under DFSG 4 but it's not exact and I have not looked for similar examples in the archive. The wording could be better and suggests a need to consult a lawyer. Actually, as a quick fix, could you just remove the undefined word Author's from it? Hope that helps, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1rphiv-0005vp...@petrol.towers.org.uk
Re: MIT +no-false-attribs
Jérémy Lal, 2012-01-24 01:55+0100: I will, and concur. But knowing upstream i can tell he'll need stronger arguments. The 3-clause BSD license would seem to be appropriate considering what the author apparently wants. -- ,--. : /` ) Tanguy Ortolo xmpp:tan...@ortolo.eu irc://irc.oftc.net/Tanguy | `-'Debian Developer \_ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jfmjul$3se$1...@dough.gmane.org
Re: MIT +no-false-attribs
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:51:44 +0800 Paul Wise wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Jérémy Lal wrote: following npm license is Expat + one restriction, License proliferation is bad, please help get rid of it by asking upstream to switch to a standard license. Fully agreed. I would recommend the zlib license: http://www.gzip.org/zlib/zlib_license.html which explicitly forbids misrepresentation of modified versions (see clause 2). -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE pgp6oXu73a7w8.pgp Description: PGP signature
