SQL-Ledger license change [LWN.net]

SQL-Ledger license change

Posted Apr 17, 2007 18:08 UTC (Tue) by ballombe (subscriber, #9523)
Parent article: SQL-Ledger license change

Reading the license, I am not impressed. I am glad it was reverted to the GPL. (Not that this excuses hatemail though)

The license is extremely poorly worded and sloppy. It does not even explicitly allow redistribution.
The license claims to be an 'Open Source License' without being OSI-certified.

I 1) cause extra liability to the users.
I 2) useless
II 1) useless
II 2) 'original work' is not defined
II 3) useless
II 4) 'standard package' is not defined; What happen if SQL-ledger site is down ?
II 5) not a condition
II 6) forbidding logo change is non-free. 'another program' is meaningless. The intend is probably non-free in nature.

A good point though: the disclaimer of warranty is lower-case.

(Log in to post comments)

SQL-Ledger license change

Posted Apr 17, 2007 18:29 UTC (Tue) by einhverfr (guest, #44407) [Link]

II 6) also binds you to his Logo terms and conditions (a trademark issue).

SQL-Ledger license change

Posted Apr 21, 2007 23:05 UTC (Sat) by einhverfr (guest, #44407) [Link]

Also I (Mr Travers) was named in the rant which has since been removed, so I feel like I should respond to one possible confusion.

The only email that I sent out was a request for translators (whose work was still licensed under the GPL) to clarify whether people could redistribute their translations with the software. I was never involved in hate-mail, and I said that it was Dieter's moral right to choose whatever license he wanted for his own code and that the other contributors should take this as an opportunity to decide whether they wanted their work distributed under this new license or not. The replies I got were about 50/50.

Mr Murtagh's email was more harsh but still not hatemail. His support account had been cancelled without warning or refund due to his participation in the project, and I do not assume that he was alone in that regard. He was upset and rightly so. But I didn't think he crossed the line in his email.