So, _if you use that distribution_ - ie, if you get a copy under that license - then it is, or at least may be, restricted. But a copyright holder may release the same information under multiple licenses, and that appears to be what happened here (with the license on the copy released to Jean being an informal and very liberal one). This sort of release of information under an alternative license with few-to-no restrictions is unusual in computers, but that's largely because people who want to release information under liberal terms usually do so from the start. KryoFlux is unusual (very pleasantly unusual, to me, but still unusual) in that they are liberalizing, rather than restricting, their license terms as time goes on. As far as copyright law is concerned, my (lay, not lawyer!) understanding is that you can do the sort of things you want to do just fine, provided you get the information via Jean's copy rather than the one that travels under the SPS license. Yes, and cb@ has said elsewhere in this thread that the license will be brought into better agreement with their intentions soon. That's good to hear, because I've been seeing a lot of dissonance between the license terms and KryoFlux's attitude (to be pedantic, their attitude as described in cb's posts); I'm glad it's the license that will be changing. True. But you also do not have to agree to that license. You then have no right to do anything with the copy of the data traveling under that license, but the same data traveling under a more liberal license is, well, under a more liberal license. (I would not blame you a bit if this made no sense to you. Most of copyright law makes little-to-no sense to me.) The only case where I would see any legal issue would be if someone took the restricted version, replaced the license terms without approval of the copyright holder, and started distributing the result. Even then, absent reason for the law's "reasonable man" to suspect this is what had happened, I am inclined to doubt that most jurisdictions would hit good-faith recipients with anything worse than a "stop doing that" order. And, in any case, I see no reason to think that's happened here - quite the opposite, in fact. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B