On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 14:02:10 -0500 "Sean Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about the BSD license? Seems similar to MIT except it adds a > clause like: Neither the name of NetSurf nor the names of its > contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from > this software without specific prior written permission. > > I'm OK with a less restrictive license, but after reading up on a few > of them I think I'd feel more comfortable knowing Company XYZ can't > use the NetSurf name or my name in promotion unless they have > permission to do so. What do you guys think? Right, all the contributors have agreed to MIT, bar yourself. I think we're all pretty easy on this - which BSD licence do you specifically prefer? There are multiple 4, 3 and 2 clause licences (some of which are functionally identical to MIT.) If you could provide a link to the licence text you feel is acceptable, I can start doing stuff to relicence. If possible, I'd like to avoid having more than a two licences in NetSurf; we already have stuff under the GPLv2 and MIT. B.
