U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Re: What license Ultimate++ should use? Tell us!!! [message #18353 is a reply to message #17774]

Wed, 24 September 2008 14:30

amrein
Messages: 278
Registered: August 2008
Location: France

Experienced Member

I made bigs mistakes in previous posts... (thanks to my friend who takes the time to corrected me)

The "New BSD license" gives you the same right as the "U++ BSD like license" because of IP law. The "New BSD license" just adds the need to tell if the original software has been modified.

My mistakes:

- You can't modify copyright if the authors doesn't give you the right to do so.

- The license apply to any parts of the software, source or binary (all parts identified as been covered by the license).

- Any part of the software, binary or source, modified or not, are copy of the software and are still covered by the license.

- Any modified part of the software, binary or source, are still covered by the license but you have a right on those modifications.

So, BSD license tells you: do whatever you want, any part or the software (binary or source, modified or not) are still covered by this license. If you use any parts of this software you must acknowledge the use of this software and display the original license (meaning, show that you include software using this license). Your own parts of the final software can use the license you want (commercial, FOSS, ...) as long as they don't conflict with the BSD license.

So, if you use "New BSD licensed" software:

- You can release commercial software or FOSS.

- You must acknowledge about using this software and show its original license (the copyright is included in the license). Your acknowledgement must be included with the software distributed and can be wherever you want (in doc, "About", ...). Could be: "This software use U++ which has the following license...".

- If you modify the original software, you must add that it has been modified in your acknowledgement. Could be: "This software use a modified version of U++. The original U++ software has the following license...".

- If you release source, any modified part of the original software must be clearly identifiable.

- If you release source, any part added to the original software (part with your own copyright and license) must be clearly identifiable.

- Any modified part of the software is still under the same original license (copyright+license). Those modifications can't use anything else then this original license. However, you don't give your right on those modifications. (Note: you can't add your name into the original copyright of the BSD licensed software but you have rights on those modifications).

- If you release source, the original copyright holders can merge the modifications back into the original source without your permission because the license permit it. But, whatever the original copyright holders do, they can't change the BSD license of your contribution if you don't agree.

Conclusion:

Note 1: U++ original copyright holders needs to find the modified parts themselves if they want to include them back. If not, they can be sued if they change the license or the copyright in the future. U++ should really adopt the "New BSD license".

Note 2: With U++ "Copyright (C) 2008 Mirek Fidler, Tomas Rylek and various contributors (see AUTHORS)", you can't modify the original copyright nor the external file named "AUTHORS". The only ones that can add or remove lines in the files "AUTHORS" are the authors and only if they all agree. To ease external contribution or been able to commit modifications from external source code easily, the authors list shouldn't be modified.

Note 3: Their are several "AUTHORS" files in U++. Each of them contain Mirek or Tomas, or sometimes both. They should be removed. The "(see AUTHORS)" statement should too. Anyone in "AUTHORS" have control over copyright of his contributions. No one can change the license or the copyright if all copyright holders don't agree. "AUTHORS" file is not accurate. A "CONTRIBUTORS" file could be added instead, just for information, and no need to include "CONTRIBUTORS" or "AUTHORS" into the license statement. This creates conflict with external submissions. If you want to know who has made contributions, just use svn repo. If your are not the authors and commit a patch from an external contributor, add his name into the "svn commit" comment. That way, you will know who, where, when and won't have issue with merging external modifications because of different "AUTHORS" listing. Different "AUTHORS" listings = different licenses.

Note 4: Google code doesn't give you choice: your software must use "New BSD" and not BSD like. If you don't want to, you can't be hosted there. Read the the google code hosting doc.

Report message to a moderator