Opinion on this "license"?

[Chuck Swiger]

On Oct 12, 2006, at 4:12 PM, Michael Poole wrote:
> It is GPL-incompatible and not open source.

Agreed to both.

> 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.

No.  They'd also have to remove the restriction against "no  
commercial redistribution" first.

-- 
-Chuck