Jesper Harder wrote:
> Yeah, or someone should try to contact the AMS. I imagine they'd be
> sympathetic to clarifying the license -- it was probably intended to
> be LPLL.
Here's what I just sent to ams@ams.org:
---------------------
The breqn latex package as referenced on
http://www.tug.org/tex-archive/help/Catalogue/entries/breqn.html
and downloadable from
ftp://ftp.ams.org/pub/tex/breqn.tgz
contains no licensing terms.
I'd like to be able to either package and/or redistribute this software
as part of the Fedora Extras software collection (http://www.fedora.us).
In the absense of any explicit licensing terms (e.g. GPL, LPPL, etc),
this is not possible. Could you please clarify this? Thank you.
--
Rex Dieter
Computer System Administrator
Department of Mathematics
University of Nebraska Lincoln