On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 13:32:38 +0530 Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/16/2009 08:15 AM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > On > > The MS Public License is acceptable for Fedora, Free but GPL > > incompatible. I'm adding it to the table now. > > Can you let me know why it is GPL incompatible? It says: If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license. We believe that the "only under this license" condition should be interpreted as a weak copyleft requirement; such requirements are customarily considered GPL-incompatible. We've discussed this with the Free Software Foundation, which agrees with our interpretation. My recollection is that when the MS-PL was submitted for OSI approval, in the ensuing discussion on license-discuss, the Microsoft legal representatives made clear that they had designed the license to be GPL-incompatible. Possibly I'm misremembering. However, Microsoft could settle the matter by clarifying whether the provision I quoted is a weak copyleft requirement, or not. - RF _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
