Re: Need opinion on license type

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 3:29 AM Mason Loring Bliss <mason@blisses.org>
wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 01:23:09AM +0100, Nuno Teixeira wrote:
>
> >    Need an opinion on what license type should be choosed for:
> >    LICENSE
> >    ---
> >    Copyright 1991, 1992, 1994, 1998, 1999, 2002   William D. Norcott
> >    License to freely use and distribute this software is hereby granted
> >    by the author, subject to the condition that this copyright notice
> >    remains intact.  The author retains the exclusive right to publish
> >    derivative works based on this work, including, but not limited to,
> >    revised versions of this work
>
> That is pretty much the definition of "not free" software. I went to look
> at graphics/xv to find what it does and found:
>
>     License: not specified in port
>
> I'm curious to see how this turns out, and as such would be grateful if
> you'd make a noise about it if you hear anything off-list.
>
> --
> Mason Loring Bliss  ((   If I have not seen as far as others, it is because
>  mason@blisses.org   ))   giants were standing on my shoulders. - Hal
> Abelson
>


This license is saying that :

You can only use and distribute this  WITHOUT making any modification
into it . Since selling is undefined , you can not sell it .
If you sell a software using that part , my opinion is , it should be
explicitly excluded from the sold part .


( I am not a lawyer . My view is not a legal advise . )


With my best wishes .


Mehmet Erol Sanliturk