Words by c.z.robertson

Greymatter licensing

2003-02-10 19:21:47 UTC

Rafe Colburn takes issue with some of Noah Grey's claims.

Which reminds me, I'm also troubled by one of Noah Grey's assertions. He claims that Greymatter is open source, but according to the Manual:

[Y]ou may not sell or in any way make a financial profit from this program, either in original or modified form.

Which doesn't really fit very well with clause 1 of the Open-Source Definition:

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.

Furthermore, the Creative Commons license that Greymatter is now licensed under (Attribution-NonCommercial) contains a similar restriction which prevents it from being open-source.

If Greymatter had been truly open-source it's fairly likely that I would never have started writing Catkin.

To be fair, inaccurate claims that a program is open-source are pretty common, and I'm sure that Noah Grey sincerely believes Greymatter to be open source. I just wish that people would use the term a bit more carefully.