U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Re: What license Ultimate++ should use? Tell us!!! [message #17504 is a reply to message #17503]

Mon, 18 August 2008 14:37

gprentice
Messages: 260
Registered: November 2005
Location: New Zealand

Experienced Member

amrein, I don't follow your conclusions about the BSD license. Wikipedia also describes BSD . I *think* "the license" is describing the use of U++ source - in either source or binary form, and does not apply to TheIDE binary itself. Any binaries distributed by U++ need their own license.

If ultimate++ was released with BSD license it might look something like this

<part1>
Copyright (c) 2008, Ultimate++, Mirek Fidler et al...
All right reserved

<part2>
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met <list of conditions>

<part3> disclaimer

The list of conditions requires that re-distributions of either source or binary must include all of part1, part2, part3 verbatim - part1, part2, part3 we call "the license". "the license" refers explicitly to U++ authors.

In the second of the 3 conditions, there is an implied part (in italics) as follows
Re-distributions of source codein binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice ... etc.

"Re-distributions" means - distributed by me, or my users or my users users etc.

As far as I can see, this means

1. If I distribute object code, executable code or anything at all (binary) that was built (partially or entirely) from any or all of the U++ source, whether modified or not, "the license" must be distributed with it, including explicit reference to U++ authors. I must require that all subsequent distribution of such binary by anyone, must be accompanied by "the license". I can ban re-distribution of the binary by my users if I want.

2. I don't have to release source code, either my own or that derived from U++. If I re-distribute source that is derived from U++ source (modified or un-modified), it must retain "the license".

Open to interpretation
"the license" says
<Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided ... 3 conditions are met>

Does this mean that if I want to distribute source, my users can also distribute and use the source (in binary or source form) without payment of royalties to me? Does the license permit me to apply additional restrictions to the use of source I supply - such as additional copyrights and licenses?

What does "source code must retain the license" mean - does "the license" have to be embedded in every source file.

MIT license doesn't seem to require keeping the disclaimer.

I vote we get some clarification on these things before changing the license and then try to make the license itself clearer and not open to interpretation.

Graeme

Report message to a moderator