I am wondering what you all think about the following open source license possibilities. Input much appreciated. Thanks.


1. I'd like to know what you would think about an open source license
   that required derived works to provide attribution to the open source
   community from which the works are derived.

   Contributor source file attribution appears to be common in the open
   source world, and I've also seen requirements for attribution in the
   written documentation.

   I'm wondering how feasible it would be to require people creating and
   distributing derived works to advertise (if they advertise)
   that their derived work was "based on the open source technology" in
   question.

2. I've heard that some community members might find an advertising
   attribution requirement unpalatable.  So I'm considering whether
   the license should also contain a non-discriminatory buy-out clause
   for anyone who found the advertising attribution unpalatable (for
   a fee.)

   It's important to me to be fair and to give credit (in a visible,
   memorable way, which documentation and fine-print attribution
   sometimes are not) to the open source origin of derived works.  I'm
   trying to find a way to do so fairly, within the context of an OSI
   approved license.

Thoughts?
Thx,
Claire Giordano




-- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

Reply via email to