Nicolas George wrote:
> Have a look at POV-Ray licence: you need written permission just to bundle
> it with a magazine...

Which does NOT apply when the bundle is a Linux distribution ... the fact is
a package maintainer should read the license and then make clear that there
is no problem to the distribution maintainers. If the package maintainers
cannot be bothered to read every license of the packages they maintain, then
maybe they should not be maintaining that many. The fact is that various
Linux distribution maintainers are so misinformed about the POV-Ray license
that they make false assertions they could trivially have avoided by just
ONCE reading the license they complain about. It is neither difficult to
understand, nor limiting about the bundling of POV-Ray with a Linux
distribution.

And if _you_ complain about the license, well, if you enjoy your work being
ripped off by huge companies for billions of profits, that is your choice.
It is not that of the POV-Ray developers, and history has unfortunately
taught us that only a license as lengthy as the one we developed over the
years allows everybody to enjoy POV-Ray for free, yet prohibits unethical
types of commercial exploitation. And you would be stunned to what length
such unethical behavior can go, but this is neither the place nor the time
to discuss the POV-Ray license.

You either enjoy the work in the form and under the conditions the POV-Ray
developers decided to distribute it, or you do not. If you do not, bad luck,
but not OUR problem! So *please* do not complain about it to us.

	Thorsten, POV-Team, but just stating *MY* opinion

Post a reply to this message