In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Vinicius Santos" writes: > On Feb 11, 2008 12:48 PM, Timothy Normand Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We're not going to BUILD an FPGA. We'd just like to TARGET one. So > > whatever hardware license they use doesn't matter. We don't care > > about which free software license is applied to software we USE, but > > we do prefer MIT licenses on software we're going to RELEASE. > > Quoting from the url: > 2.Only non-commercial, not-for-profit use of this software is > permitted. No part of this software may be incorporated into a > commercial product without the written consent of the authors (Vaughn > Betz, Alexander (Sandy) Marquardt and Jonathan Rose). Similarly, use > of this software to assist in the development of new commercial FPGA > architectures is prohibited, unless the written consent of the authors > is obtained. > > I would say "use of this software" includes targeting a FPGA, the > hardware license is just another term.
Sounds to me like: OGP, OHF, and end-users can use it, but TT cannot, unless TT obtains written consent. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
