> Indeed it looks very close to my usual license.
> Any known drawback with this license ?

Not that I know of, nor that I can see.  It seems
very close to the MIT license, except that the MIT
license does not provide for the clear distinction of
modifications from the original work -- which, in my
opinion, is also the main point of your license.

Here's a discussion I found on the license when the
author was submitting it for approval by the Open
Source Initiative:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg07630.html

A quick Google search appears to show that the
license is popular.  And as far as I know, it is very
common in academic research institutions.

I also found version 2.0 of the license, which is
based on the Apache license (again, adding the
provision for distinction of derivative works).  Its
basically the same thing but with more legal-speak. 
I am not a lawyer, so I cannot tell whether any of
that verbiage is actually necessary, but it seems to
be in many software licenses nowadays, and perhaps
that was the intention.  However, it seems to mostly
protect against patent lawsuits, which I understand
would be an issue to a research institution.

"Educational Community License, Version 2.0"


To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be

Reply via email to