> "Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
> documentation for any purpose, WITHOUT FEE, and without a written
> agreement is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice
> and this paragraph and the following two paragraphs appear in all
> copies."
My personal interpretation isn't very ambiguous at all. If the license
were interpreted to require that you could not charge to provide someone
with a copy of postgres, that would imply that you aren't allowed to
have a written agreement with them either. That just doesn't make sense
to me.
I can see how a lawyer might tell someone to play it safe though. Also,
I suppose in any disagreement over the ambiguity of a text, the side
perceiving ambiguities is bound to win ;)
regards,
jeff davis