License in question

[Chuck Swiger]

Dirk Huenniger wrote:
> I would like to use a library in an GPLed project and distribute this 
> library together with the project. The library is licensed in the following
> way. Do you know if this is Ok or would you suggest to use another (GPLed
> but less documented packed) package instead?

The license you've suggested is midway between the old and the new BSD license 
(ie, the distinction pertains to your license's second clause).  It appears to 
be GPL-compatible, but I'd ask for a second opinion from <licensing at fsf.org> if 
you wanted to be sure.

Certainly you could use the new-style BSD license with GPL code instead, if you 
wanted to.  Also, your disclaimer (clause #1) may be of questionable validity, 
but to some extent that remains true no matter what language is placed into a 
disclaimer section.

-- 
-Chuck

> /Copyright (c) 2000-2005 by Nicolas Devillard.
> Written by Nicolas Devillard. Not derived from licensed software.
>  
> Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any
> purpose on any computer system, and to redistribute it freely,
> subject to the following restrictions:
>  
> 1. The author is not responsible for the consequences of use of
>    this software, no matter how awful, even if they arise
>    from defects in it.
>  
> 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either
>    by explicit claim or by omission.
>  
> 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not
>    be misrepresented as being the original software.
>  
> 4. This notice may not be removed or altered./