On 13/12/2007, Sean Middleditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Which license would be most appropriate for the C standard headers? I'm > not sure that the LLVM license with the advertising clause would be the > best bet, since those headers get compiled into end-user's applications, > but IANAL. Personal preference would be public domain, or MIT/X license > if the no-liability stuff is considered important, but I'll use whatever > the project leads say I should.
Something like Boost's license, I'd say. And it can't be public domain, see http://www.rosenlaw.com/lj16.htm : "there is nothing that permits the dumping of intellectual property into the public domain — except as happens in due course when any applicable copyrights expire" > (Some of these headers are so small and > are just directly taken from the standard's wording that I'm not even > sure copyright is applicable, but meh.) I wonder how close they can get without being derivative works of the standard... ~ Scott -- Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? _______________________________________________ cfe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
