D1x license

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 04:31:51PM -0400, Michael Wiktowy wrote:
> While I totally agree with you that allowing non-commercial restrictions 
> on packages in Extras adds complexity to the repackaging of Extras for 
> commercial purposes. I don't think that the aversion to that complexity 
> justifies the complete exclusion of those packages from Extras.

What are "commercial purposes"? Can the package be used as part of my job
that makes money? What if I work for a non-profit? What if I don't? What if
I do consulting using my Fedora Extras box, and a utility I use is linked
against library with this restriction? What if I'm working on some
grant-funded project that uses this software, and the results of that work
gets spun off into a startup company?

Both the GPL and the BSD licenses avoid all of this, for good reason.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 80 degrees Fahrenheit.