Yet another license question

[Rahul Sundaram]

Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> 
>> I'll ask the FSF, and we'll go from their recommendation.
> 
> Seeing that RMS himself confirmed "approving" the license of
> Dansguardian for the FSF two weeks ago, that won't do you much good
> in determining the true meaning of the license.
> 
> I would have packaged dansguardian if it wasn't for the misleading
> barrage of weirdo disclaimers:
> 
> 	Before downloading, please read the copyright for DansGuardian
> 	2. DansGuardian is not free for commercial use. DansGuardian may not
> 	be used by Military governments such as SPDC in Myanmar (formally known
> 	as Burma).
> 
> and
> 
> 	For all non-commercial use DansGuardian 2 can be downloaded under the GPL.
> 
> That after careful reading means "GPL but a strict AUP exists for downloading
> from my server and official mirrors". So it is free (and debian includes it),
> but I'm not willing to support weirdo subjective AUP's for the official download
> site. (eg: I am blocked from downloading the source twice from his server if
> I sell it once or if I ever do a contract for the burmese government, despite the
> software being GPL)
> 

You cant add restrictions on top of GPL. Once it is licensed as GPL then 
it is Free software and can be used the terms of the license which does 
allow commercial usage. IMO, you can ignore the author's confusion and 
include it in Fedora.

Rahul