copyleft lite? - rev 3

Thanks for the feedback so far! By without fee I meant that copyright holder(s) were not imposing a fee; this was confusing and unnecessary so I removed it. I see what you meant meant about the rights not specifically granted are reserved being superfluous. I've removed it for now, but might

Re: copyleft lite?

These terms will make it not GPL compatible because the GPL is not identical to these terms. Maybe something like the source code (including any modifications) must be made available to the recipients under these terms or the terms of the GNU General Public License... --- Bruce Dodson [EMAIL

Re: copyleft lite?

Bruce Dodson wrote: disclaimers appear in supporting documentation. When you distribute this software outside your organization, the source code (including any modifications) must be made available to the recipients under these license terms. You have not defined the copyleft

Re: copyleft lite?

: Saturday, July 13, 2002 5:40 AM Subject: Re: copyleft lite? These terms will make it not GPL compatible because the GPL is not identical to these terms. Maybe something like the source code (including any modifications) must be made available to the recipients under these terms or the terms

Re: copyleft lite?

Seems to me that it is not GPL compatible. The GPL expressly prohibits combining with licenses that have more restrictive terms than the GPL. without fee is a restriction the GPL does not include. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

Re: copyleft lite?

Bruce Dodson wrote: All rights not specifically granted in this agreement are reserved to the copyright holder(s). That one line is superfluous. That is what the statute book says. Since it there in the statute book, this is how it will be, whether you say it or not. Your rights to

Re: copyleft lite?

Mahesh T Pai wrote: That one line is superfluous. That is what the statute book says. Since it there in the statute book, this is how it will be, whether you say it or not. IANAL, but isn't that true only until they change the statute book? In other words, isn't there something to be said

copyleft lite?

I'm trying for a simple, easy-to-read license with some degree of copyleft. I hope it will be compatible with the GPL also. Please take a look at the following, and help me find any flaws. Thanks, Bruce __ software program name. Copyright (c) year(s) copyright holder(s). All