Bug#122929: wpoison, is it okay?
I've been following the discussion, and it looks like wpoison, if
determined free, will have the dubious distinction of being the first
program in main (that I know of) with a clickwrap license that attempts
to control use. (namely, it requires every user [0] to display the wpoison
logo and link to the wpoison web page from their site [1])
Oddly enough, though, I can't find a clause in the DFSG excluding this
sort of license. I'm somewhat surprised, actually; maybe it's just
because clickwrap licenses tend to be so onerous that they fail one of
the other points anyway.
I'm not a lawyer, though, so I'll butt out now. Maybe you should ask
debian-legal?
Daniel
[0] and, apparently, every website which "makes reference to this
software"; I guess I'm causing lists.debian.org to violate wpoison's
license with this message? That sounds like nonsense to me..
[1] the intent seems to be something like the clauses that require
credit to the original authors to be given in derivatives; is there
any way you could twist a website using wpoison into being a
derivative work?
--
/-------------------- Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> -------------------\
| Fate always wins... |
| at least, when people stick to the rules. |
| -- Terry Pratchett, _Interesting Times_ |
\------- (if (not (understand-this)) (go-to http://www.schemers.org)) --------/
Reply to: