[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Licensing problems with xscrabble

On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 08:45:54PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > I'm inclined to say that we need explicit permission to modify and to
> > distribute modified versions. Apart from that, though, what do you think
> > about the last clause? Is it equivalent to "... must reproduce the above
> > copyright notice ... in the documentation and/or other materials
> > provided with the distribution" clause in the modern BSD licence, or is
> > it equivalent to the old BSD advertising clause?
> When you talk to him, consider having him use the bsd with advert.  Gives him
> what he wants plus the legal indemnity clause.

No, he doesn't need the advertising clause for that.  He said "must
reproduce the copyright notice in documentation and/or other materials
provided with the distribution".

3-clause BSD, or the MIT license, is probably ideal.

G. Branden Robinson                |     One man's "magic" is another man's
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     engineering.  "Supernatural" is a
branden@debian.org                 |     null word.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpGcx8jSanNq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: