Re: Thoughts on GPL's Appropriate Legal Notices? or the CPAL?
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Clark C. Evans wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011, at 01:37 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > An interactive user interface displays "Appropriate Legal Notices"
> > to the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently
> > visible feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice,
> > and (2) tells the user that there is no warranty for the work
> > (except to the extent that warranties are provided), that
> > licensees may convey the work under this License, and how to view
> > a copy of this License.
> I think these are the criteria used to know when a work is
> displaying Appropriate Legal Notices, not that it would limit items
> to be included.
This paragraph does both; it describes how Appropriate Legal Notices
[ALN] can be displayed, and how ALN are defined. Anything which is not
enumerated there does not appear to be an ALN.
> So, I think Attribution is absolutely included, the question for me
> is if "Powered By SugarCRM" is a reasonable author attribution. I
> like Simon's wording of something that would be covered...
The critical aspect here is whether author attributions are required
to be preserved in the material, or also in the ALNs. Retaining them
in the material is clearly reasonable, but I don't believe that
forcing them to be present in the ALN is consistent with the terms of
But in any event, since no one appears to be planning on packaging
sugarCRM for Debian, I'll just stop here.
More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads.
One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
The other, to total extinction.
Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
-- Woody Allen