* Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
> > > > Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
> > > > original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
> > > > these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further
> > > > restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
> > > > You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
> > > > this License.
> > >
> > > I don't see the distinction here. Where does it say having to include
> > > another license is a different additional restriction from an
> > > advertizing clause?
> >
> > Erm, I thought I included it already, but...
> >
> > 1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
> > source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
> > conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
> > copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
> > notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
> > and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
> > along with the Program.
> >
> > That's an existing restriction in the GPL, therefore a restriction in
> > another license for the same thing is acceptable to the GPL for a
> > resultant work. You'll also note above it says "an appropriate
> > copyright notice".
>
> I don't see were is says that another license's restriction that is the
> same as a GPL restriction, but for a different license, is OK.
It says that above under 6- You may not impose any *further*
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
I appriciate your pedantism but in the end it really doesn't matter very
much. This is, aiui anyway, the way Debian interprets the various
licenses. You're welcome to your own interpretation.
Thanks,
Stephen