[Fedora-legal-list] Is license of cleanfeed right?

[Roman Rakus]

Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 15:42 +0200, Roman Rakus wrote:
>   
>> LICENSE
>>     This software may be distributed freely, provided it is intact
>>     (including all the files from the original archive). You may
>>     modify it, and you may distribute your modified version,
>>     provided the original work is credited to the appropriate
>>     authors, and your work is credited to you (don't make changes
>>     and pass them off as my work), and that you aren't charging for
>>     it.
>>
>> Is it ok?
>> "That last sentence may or may not cause this to become non-free :("
>>     
>
> Indeed, that last sentence makes the license non-free. Before we pull it
> from Fedora, you should try to contact the upstream maintainer and see
> if he'll drop that final clause.
>
> Preventing someone from selling free software is rather pointless and
> silly, because people will always be able to get it at no cost from
> someone.
>
> ~spot
>
>   
Upstream maintainer changed and with him also license. Now it is 
"Artistic license". I'm not sure, if is free or not, but I think that is 
free. Reading in attach...
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: LICENSE
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/attachments/20080707/7344c00d/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rrakus.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/attachments/20080707/7344c00d/attachment.vcf>