and the 'obnoxious advertising clause' seemingly puts a stop to it..
I understand that 'obnoxious advertising clause' is the phrase used by the FSF to describe this type of license clause, however I wonder whether you (personally, or as an organisation) really find it to be 'obnoxious'?
Personally, I am *happy* to respect clause 4.
Please, don't try to critize the FSF just for the fun of it.
I did not intend any fun, nor criticism.
Have you read the FSF's comment about the original 'obnoxious advertising clause' ? The problem is a practical one, and a real one: The old BSD license said that, if you incorporated their code in your product, every advertisement for your product had to carry this line:
This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley and its contributors.
Yes, but thats *not* what the ZPL clause 4 says. ZPL says you only need to include the acknowledgement in an advertisement "mentioning features derived from or use of this software". As I read this you need not include the acknowlegement if your advertisement: a. does not mention features derived from Zope b. does not mention that it uses Zope