Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » Coffee corner » What license Ultimate++ should use? Tell us!!!
Re: What license Ultimate++ should use? Tell us!!! [message #17557 is a reply to message #17553] Wed, 20 August 2008 15:20 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
gprentice is currently offline  gprentice
Messages: 260
Registered: November 2005
Location: New Zealand
Experienced Member
luzr wrote on Wed, 20 August 2008 23:48

Well, I looks like BSD is going to win.

I guess it is the most logical and least "expensive" step, in fact we are not changing anything, just fixing the license wording.

Should we wait more or should I just "fix" it?

Mirek



I don't think you should change the license yet. As far as I can see, with BSD license, you can't use U++ to develop commercial software because if you use any U++ source in your product, you have to include the BSD license in your product (even if you only supply binaries), which potentially gives your customers the right to sell or give away your product.

The BSD license says
Quote:

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:


My question is : "redistribution and use of what?"

The BSD license doesn't make it clear that what is meant is
Redistribution and use of the source codein source and binary forms ...

Also, I would like to see clarification of whether you can distribute U++ derived source code along with your own source code, with your own non-BSD license applying to your own non-U++-derived source code (even though it #includes U++ headers) - meaning that you can distribute all your source code without making your product worthless.

With BSD license, if all you distribute is binaries, you still have to include the license in about box or something - why is that ??? If the license applies to source code only then what is the point of including a license saying "permission is granted to redistribute ..." when you haven't given them any source code to redistribute. The "about box" should only have to include the copyright part and disclaimer, not the list of permissions.

BSD license is murky.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179

Graeme
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Linux Mandriva
Next Topic: Using .NET components
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun May 05 17:51:22 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01952 seconds