Lewis Jardine wrote:
Ludovic Rousseau wrote:It seams the only human possible solution is to ask RSA to change their licence. I guess the Mozilla foundation could help if they care about licencing issues. Any idea of how we should contact Mozilla and RSA? I am really _not_ adiplomatic guy :-)I'd expect Mozilla are interested in getting this file BSDed as part of their tri-licensing project, so it might make sense to simply draw Mozilla's attention to this problem and leave approaching RSA to them.
There seems to be some confusion about Mozilla's current and future licensing status in this thread. The topic implies Mozilla is under the GPL; this isn't true until the relicensing project is finished. We hope to have that done soon, but it's not done yet. The above comment suggests that we are relicensing to a BSD-like licence; that also isn't true, the target relicensing scheme is an MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-licence.
Ludo has drawn my attention to the problem; as I originally read the licence, "this document" referred to the header file, which no-one ever talks about, and so the restriction was in practice meaningless.
If that turns out not to be true, we may have more of a problem. The file was originally contributed, with an NPL/GPL dual licence, by Netscape Communications Corp. I would like to think that they would have got clearance to issue the file under that licence before contributing it...
Gerv