Re: Choosing a License: GNU APL? AFL 3.0?
Ben Finney wrote:
> I hope I've explained above that it's not the *license* that does
> this, but copyright law itself. You, as copyright holder in your work,
> are free to choose license terms and put an appropriate copyright
> notice in your files when you distribute them. If you grant permission
> to redistribute at all, it's copyright law that requires that notice
> to be included in any redistributions of that work until you
> explicitly give permission to the contrary.
One case where this could become problematic is when permission is
granted to create derivative works. If the derivative work can be
distributed in binary-only form, then the copyright notices in the
source code become irrelevant. In such a case, a requirement like
article 2 of the BSD license to put a notice in the documentation
would be a good idea.
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/