OSI, licenses, MPL
raz at arrakis.com.au
Wed Feb 16 14:10:23 UTC 2000
> the list of pre-approved licenses seems to vary widely in terms of
> general vs. specific use. for example, L/GPL are very general. on the
> other hand, MPL has a lot of Netscape-centric language that *must be
> changed* prior to it's use for a project other than Mozilla. do those
> changes constitute a new license?
> in the specific case of using MPL for a new open source project, which
> is currently in my crosshairs, a better solution might be an MPL 1.2
> that preserves the core of MPL, but which provides more "fill in these
> blanks" to allow cusomization of the license to a specific project.
Having just re-examined MPL 1.1 for all occurrences of the word
"Netscape", it does not seem that there is any need to change the
license at all for use on other projects. Yes, it's Netscape's license,
but the only uses of the word Netscape (and other protected marks) are
to identify who can release new versions of the license (in the same
sense that the Gnu [L]GPL mentions Gnu/FSF) and to make clear that marks
are not being licensed. You can certainly apply the license, as is, to
an entirely new project and just fill in the blanks.
More information about the License-discuss