NCSA Open Source License

[Brian Behlendorf]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Albert Chin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 07:29:12PM -0800, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > > OK - one might consider that it's one license _text_ rather than
> > > 4, but yes it's three licenses. Is it possible to sucessfully
> > > lobby Apache to get rid of the advertising clause? They probably
> > > have enough experience now to see it's had no positive effect.
> >
> > Um, no.  We are talking about a rev of the Apache license to address
> > some concerns, but there are things about the current "advertising"
> > clause (you've read it recently, right?  It's GPL compatible, we
> > believe) that are pretty positive for us.
>
> According to
> http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses,
> neither v1.0 or 1.1 of the Apache License is GPL-compatible. The 1.1
> license is on Apache 1.3.22 and what is currently 2.0 in development.

It's the new "advertising" clause that is compatible, because satisfying
the requirements of GPL also satisfies the requirements of that clause.
We still have a restriction on what you may name derivative works that is
not GPL compatible in the eyes of the FSF.

	Brian

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3