On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 08:18:30PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote: > Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > You mean allow linking and explicitely allow distribution, right? > > Yes. > > > You don't mean invoking the major components bit do you? > > No, I think that is a clumsy solution to the problem. > > > "You may link this software with XForms (Copyright (c) by > > T.C. Zhao and Mark Overmars) and distribute the resulting > > binary. You are not required to include this paragraph in the > > license for derivatives of this software." > > I feel a little bad about the *unrestricted* permission to distribute > the resulting binary; see my previous message. > > Also I think it would be a good thing (even if not strictly > required by law) to spell out explicitly that you are not > purporting to relicense XForms itself. > > I would suggest > > "You may link this software with XForms (Copyright (C) by > T.C. Zhao and Mark Overmars) and distribute the resulting > binary, under the restrictions in clause 3 of the GPL, > even though the resulting binary is not, as a whole, > covered by the GPL. (You still need a separate license > to do so from the owner(s) of the copyright for XForms, > however). You are not required to include this paragraph > in the license for deriviatives of this software. >
I know this seems silly, but it might be wise to make it clear that when that paragraph is removed the rights granted by it are also revoked. -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
