Heya David Paleino wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:49:35 +0100, Mark Weyer wrote: > >> What I am looking for: >> - Copyleft with source requirement, but should not contaminate other >> software. >> - No additional burden on anyone. In particular no requirements for >> derivatives to advertize, to not advertize, to follow some naming >> convention, or to convey source code at runtime. >> - No distinction between programs, libraries, images, scripts, >> documentation, or whatever. >> Formulations should equally apply to all sorts of software. >> The only distinction should be source vs. non-source. >> - Oh, and of course it should be DFSG-free. >> >> Also, I am very sceptical about patent retaliation clauses. > > What about a BSD-like license [0], or also the MIT/X11 license [1]? > > [0] /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD -- obviously change "The Regents of the > University of California" (and all references to the University) to your > name/company/whatever. > > [1] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php > > > Both seem to conform to your requirements, if I'm not mistaken. One of the requirements is copyleft. BSD style licenses are not, eg Mac OS X is BSD-based but still proprietary. > > > Kindly, > David >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature