Re: Custom license question (Glk libraries)
"Niko Tyni" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
Fine. So, as I understand, the only possible problem is documentation,
since the license doesn't explicitly give permission to modify it or
distribute modified versions. It's only speaking of 'the code'.
All the documentation in these libraries is a few README/TODO files,
with no copyright information inside. Does this mean that in principle
I should either drop them or ask Zarf to mention them in the license?
This seems a bit extreme, and I wouldn't like to bother him if there's
Personally, I understand the documenation to mean the glk spec.
I see no reason why Zarf would want to exclude distribution such as README
You can seek clarification, but since coders generally look at things like
'Reame' and todo files
as more code than documention (Not a manual of any kind), I doubt you really
To sum it up:
Thius is not legal advice, but i would personally go ahead.