> Actually, GPL software can be used for commercial work, and even
> sold, so long as the code remains free. If they really don't want
> commercial use, then GPL doesn't work for them. I can't imagine
> why it matters, but I suppose they have their reasons.
They may or may not have considered the GPL scenario, which is why I
wrote them to ask. It is also not clear what "commercial use" is. I'm
pretty sure they intend to exclude the possibility of having their code
incorporated into a commercial computer algebra system (like Maple or
Mathematica), at least without compensation. But beyond that, it is
unclear to me what "commercial use" is, or what sort of "researcher"
they have in mind. Only a researcher in computer algebra systems? How
about an academic researcher in physics? How about an academic
researcher who is working on a contract for NASA? for Morton-Thiokol (a
NASA contractor)? for Hitachi (strictly business)? How about a
researcher in physics who works at an IBM or BASF research lab (the kind
that publishes its results)? How about an engineer who works at an IBM
or BASF product development group? How about a consulting engineer
whose main stock in trade is his/her application of computer algebra
systems to clients' problems? Where exactly do they want to draw the
line?
That is why I asked them explicitly what their license terms are.
-s