> > You are free to use Batch (the "icon set") or any
part thereof (the
> > "icons") in any personal, open-source or commercial work without
> > obligation of payment (monetary or otherwise) or attribution. Do not
> > sell the icon set, host the icon set or rent the icon set (either in
> > existing or modified form).
> That is apparent *nonfree* licence, probably a homebrew one, so it
> does not have any name.
I'm saying this with no particular authority
Neither do I, of course.
but it seems to me that the two conflicting statements
I’m afraid, I cannot see any conflicting statements here. Do you mean that ‘commercial’
should be read as ‘sale’? There are many pretty valid commercial activities that are
possible with a piece of software besides selling or renting it to someone, and I cannot
not a reason why a proprietor of a nonfree software might not wish to forbid only these
(And otherwise: does the word ‘sale’ by itself imply solely commercial basis in the USA?)
are meant to do something similar to the SIL Open Font License —
allow the content to be used as part of a work but to forbid its
sale _as a thing in itself_.
It might be worth noting, that SIL OFL explicitly *allows* selling a font accompanied by
| 2) Original or Modified Versions of the Font Software may be bundled,
| redistributed and/or sold with any software, provided that each copy
| contains the above copyright notice and this license. These can be
| included either as stand-alone text files, human-readable headers or
| in the appropriate machine-readable metadata fields within text or
| binary files as long as those fields can be easily viewed by the user.
I'll leave it to legal to say whether they agree that that's
probably intent and whether it *works* like that.
If that is a homebrew licence, the best thing to do, I suppose, would be to request
clarifications from authors of the icon set. Thankfully, there are only couple of them,
as I can see.