[tex-live] EC license

[Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard]

Alexander Cherepanov a écrit :
> Sure, maintaning sane namespace is vital. But license is a wrong tool 
> for that. First, it doesn't work. Look, FSF says that the renaming 
> requirement is acceptable for latex only because it's easy to overcome
> (see http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/#LPPL-1.2 ). And, of course, 
> a license of EC fonts doesn't have any say in naming of independently 
> created fonts.
> 
> Second, many renaming clauses are overreaching. LPPL permits to take 
> excerpts without restriction and that is great. The EC license doesn't. 
> Symbols for the intersection of T1 and T2* encodings in LH fonts are 
> taken from EC fonts. Restriction for names in this case doesn't look 
> useful (LH fonts can not be used as a replacement for EC fonts), it just 
> complicates the license situation.
> 
I think you're making good points here. They'll probably even more useful in a
mail to the author, if you'd like to write him :-)

By the way, I wonder whether it would be realistic to put up some standard
argumentation about why (strong) naming clauses are often undesirable, that one
could point authors to (or get inspiration from) when asking them to reconsider
their initial licence choice.

Unfortunately it is hard to start a discussion about this point without getting
rapidly to trolls or at least overstatements...

Manuel.