RaphaŽl Quinet wrote:
I'd suggest dual licensing:
1 - "old-style" BSD with advertising clause
2 - GPL or LGPL

I was in the process of moving the code to the following XFree-style license if that's okay. I don't see the utility in dual-licensing since either of the above can trivially subsume the proposed license (apologies for mozilla deciding to kill the formatting):

Copyright (C) 200X XXXXXX XXXXXXX (the "Author"). All Rights Reserved.

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is fur-
nished to do so, subject to the following conditions:


The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FIT-
NESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER
IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CON-
NECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.


Except as contained in this notice, the name of the Author of the
Software shall not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote the sale,
use or other dealings in this Software without prior written authorization
from the Author.


-- Adam D. Moss . ,,^^ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.foxbox.org/ co:3 busting makes me feel good kthx bye

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to