Opinion on this "license"?

[Michael Poole]

Gene Smith writes:

> "This Software is Freeware. It is distributed for free. You may copy,
> modify and use it for free as well as distribute it to others. You may
> only distribute it as a whole, unmodified and with all trademarks and
> copyright notices. You may not distribute it commercially (e.g. as a
> Share-/Freeware-Distributor) without the express written permission of
> Yoyodynaics, Inc. SINCE THIS SOFTWARE IS DISTRIBUTED FOR FREE,
> IT IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF ANY
> KIND EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED
>
> WARRANTIES FOR MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR USE. ANY USE OF THE
> APPLICATION EXAMPLE IS ON YOUR OWN RISK AND RESPONSIBILITY.
> If you happen to find any faults in it please tell us."
>
> This pertains to a kernel driver for a proprietary board. Could this
> be distributed with other GPL code? I think they are saying you can
> modify it for your own use but if you distribute it it must remain
> intact.  But then they say you can't distribute it commercially as
> Share-/Freeware. What does this mean? Linux and other programs can be
> distributed commercially by companies but are not called
> share/freeware except by the clueless. So what does this mean?

It is GPL-incompatible and not open source.  The requirement to
distribute unmodified makes it GPL incompatible but (if it allows
patches to accompany the work, which is unclear) might fit as open
source.  The need to get permission for commercial distribution makes
it GPL-incompatible and not open source.  At best, this is a "shared
source" license.

Michael Poole