[tex-live] the "open publication licence"

[Karl Berry]

    > we (ctan team) are engaged in updates of several of our user (web)
    > interfaces, and this licence arose as a conflict in our existing
    > stuff (in one place we list it as a free licence, in another as a
    > nonfree one).
    >
    > can anyone suggest a definitive interpretation, or where we might find
    > a definitive interpretation, of the import of the licence?

The GNU interpretation is essentially the same as the Debian
"ftp-masters", as far as I can tell.  You can find the GNU statement
about it as the last item in this section:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#FreeDocumentationLicenses

BTW, I was the one who suggested to Jim that the OPL be called nonfree,
or at least non-dfsg (because of the problems stated).

http://ctanweb.ctan.org/cgi-bin/searchByLicense.py reports that there is
nothing on CTAN using it.  If that's so, maybe the simplest solution is
to remove it from your lists altogether?

k