On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:57 AM, Daπid <davidmenhur@gmail.com> wrote:

On 24 October 2016 at 16:25, Dieter Werthmüller <dieter@werthmuller.org> wrote:
>
> 1. Copyright(C) 1996 Takuya OOURA (email: ooura@mmm.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp).
> 2. You may use, copy, modify this code for any purpose and without fee.
> 3. You may distribute this ORIGINAL package.
> In the second sentence, it basically states that you can do whatever you
> want with it. Then as far as I understand the third sentence, it just
> gives additionally and specifically the permission to even distribute
> the unchanged package. Or does the absence of the word 'distribute' in
> the second sentence cause a problem?

With my scientist hat on, I think that he intended to let you do
whatever you want with it, but with my not-really-a-lawyer hat, it can
be interpreted both ways, so an actual lawyer may get squeamish
without a more explicit agreement.

Agreed. With common sense it's clearly fine to reuse his code, but legal stuff isn't common sense - it could also be read as giving permission to redistribute only the original code and not a modified version.

Ralf