Thoughts on GPL's Appropriate Legal Notices? or the CPAL?
Is there a debian-legal position on "Appropriate Legal Notices"
aspect of the GPLv3. Including 5(d) and 7(b); OR, alternatively,
the OSI approved Common Public Attribution License ("CPAL").
I'm asking because having appropriate credit really resonates
with with those in my organization who are getting behind
releasing our entire medical informatics system (and modules).
So, this could be done under GPL /w ALN or under the CPAL.
In particular, what of SugarCRM's use of this mechanism?
* The interactive user interfaces in modified source and object code
* of this program must display Appropriate Legal Notices, as required
* Section 5 of the GNU Affero General Public License version 3.
* In accordance with Section 7(b) of the GNU Affero General Public
License version 3,
* these Appropriate Legal Notices must retain the display of the
* SugarCRM" logo. If the display of the logo is not reasonably feasible
* technical reasons, the Appropriate Legal Notices must display the
* "Powered by SugarCRM".
Perhaps a bit more strongly worded than the GPL permits, however,
it is consistent with CPAL's language in section 14.