[CLUE-Talk] Is this an open source license?

[Joe "Zonker" Brockmeier]

On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:42:38 -0700, Matt Gushee <mgushee at havenrock.com> wrote:
> They do have a license that they consider to be open source. To me
> it smells more like Sun's "Community" license than a genuine OSS
> license--but I'd be interested in hearing some other opinions on this.
> With the understanding, of course that IANAL/YANAL (unless you're Matt
> Porter ;-).

It doesn't fit the OSI definition of Open Source:

1. Free Redistribution

The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away
the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution
containing programs from several different sources. The license shall
not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

Pretty cut-and-dried... any restriction on selling the software
disqualifies the license from being OSI-compliant.

Zonker

-- 
Joe "Zonker" Brockmeier
xonker at gmail.com
"Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, doctor, and I'm happy
to state I finally won out over it." ~ Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey"