Including open source within a larger package

[Chris F Clark]

Dear Friends,

I have a question about the logistics in releasing some sources under
an open source license (in particular the GPL).  However, what I want
to release is going to ba a component of a larger package, which
includes some materials for which source will not be provided for (but
which the recipients will be able to redistribute). I would, of
course, not like to write a new license, if I can avoid it.

I am a little concerned about releasing something that is not source
(i.e. not human readable) under the GPL without providing the source
material (which I am unable to do as some of the source material is
under non-disclosure or other license terms, although I have the right
to release non-human readable versions).

Therefore, I would like to distribute the package under the following
terms:
		<Product> Gratis-ware License, version 0

1) You, the recipient, have rights to use this copy of the material
   furnished as provided by copyright and other applicable laws.  This
   license does not restrict any rights you might otherwise have under
   such laws.

2) You, the recipient, may use (including copying, redistributing, and
   creating derived works) any materials that are considered "human
   readable" (including software source code and documentation) in
   accordance with the GNU Public License (GPL) version 2.  All such
   materials are marked with copyright notices.  Materials NOT MARKED
   with a copyright notice are not considered "human readable" and are
   NOT licensed to you under the GPL version 2.

3) You, the recipient, in addition to the above, may make verbatim
   copies and redistribute such copies as long as all copyright and
   other notices are copied intact. This includes the right to make
   and redistribute verbatim copies of the materials which are not
   "human readable".


Before I go off and hire myself a lawyer to draft a license along
these lines, I just want to validate that what I'm doing will not
contravene the GPL and that I can still consider such sources to be
"open source" even though the package in its entirety is not.  If so,
it is a step, from which I can work on replacing the non-open source
portions of the package with open source counterparts.

Please, note this is not a request for free legal advice, just some
relatively informed opinions.  Any lawyers on the list who wish to
send me a proposal for turning the above terms into a complete license
are free to submit quotations for such work, which I will duly
consider.

Regards,
-Chris

*****************************************************************************
Chris Clark                    Internet   :  compres at world.std.com
Compiler Resources, Inc.       Web Site   :  http://world.std.com/~compres  
23 Bailey Rd                   voice      :  (508) 435-5016
Berlin, MA  01503  USA         fax        :  (978) 838-0263  (24 hours)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------