Quoting Luis Villa (l...@tieguy.org): > As a practical matter, indicating, tracking and relying on waiver is a > bit of a pain. e.g., lets say upstream says: > > "I give you a copy of the license this work is licensed under by > pointing you at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html";
The competent (and bog-standard) method of stating a waiver is inline in licensor's copyright notice. Copyright (C) 2012 George Tirebiter. This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version, with the additional permission that licensor waives any requirement to include a copy of the license text. This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details. > Or to put it another way: OSI spent a lot of time and energy > discouraging people from using custom licenses. Custom waivers > (particularly for something trivial like this) are just another form > of the same mess. I cannot see that licensor voluntarily adding an extra right to the bundle otherwise conveyed creates a problem. However, whether OSI likes the practice or not, my point is that it occurs in the real world and solves practical problems. I don't have time to check implementation, but recall that this issue arose when my frined Marc Merlin created a custom package of the Exim MTA at VA Linux Systems that added OpenSSL integration for TLS/SMTPS and offered it for public download. I said to Marc 'Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but your derivative of Phil Hazel's Exim code violates his copyright because OpenSSL includes GPL-incompatible code modules written by Eric A. Young back when it was called SSLeay.' Marc cursed me out (as if _I_ had caused the problem), and then did the obvious and asked Phil Hazel to add a licence exception permitting use with OpenSSL, which he reportedly did. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
