We have a similar problem with Nordic code where due to older
restrictive license terms we can't release the source for some projects.
The terms have gotten friendlier with time, but the earliest stuff was
quite restrictive.
I'd suggest getting in touch with Nordic, though. They're probably open
to making some changes in certain situations. If you need a contact
there, just send me a private email but I know Sterling already knows a
mutual contact that would be a good person to explain the issue to and
hopefully get the ball rolling on what will ideally lead to compatible
license terms(???). It seems like it would be in their interest and most
of this code isn't useful on anything other than their own silicon anyway.
On 10/11/16 02:12, Christopher Collins wrote:
Hi Justin,
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 08:33:54AM +1100, Justin Mclean wrote:
Hi,
The first clause, Grant of License, seems to be problematic:
Look like it "non-sub licensable” may be an issue? And "solely in
connection with a Nordic Integrated Circuit” reads like a field of use
restriction to me [1]
Section 4 of the license re distribution may also be a concern.
That was indeed my fear. Thanks for calling attention to section 4 as
well.
Their modified BSD license also may be an issue as it also looks to
includes a field of use restriction.
You are right - I hadn't noticed that. However, the fourth clause
is missing in the actual commits that were made to address this ticket
(https://github.com/ARMmbed/ble-nrf51822/commit/6d1bf116e156b870099694f0ce27076c236c4f44).
Maybe there was some additional communication between the mbed team and
Nordic that let to the actual changes.
I assume this is optional in that not everyone would need to use it?
Yes, these files are optional in the sense that Mynewt can still be
used without them. However, someone wishing to use Mynewt with a Nordic
MCU will probably won't get very far without them.
1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x
Thanks, Chris
