For Approval: TrueCrypt Collective License Version 2.0
counsel at truecrypt.org
Tue Jul 11 18:29:49 UTC 2006
Matthew Seth Flaschen wrote:
> All of these licenses should be submitted separately, to allow their
> separate use.
Yes, we plan to submit the component licenses separately after this
license (including its component licenses) is approved as a whole. This
is very important to us, as we cannot distribute our product under only
one of the component licenses. We need OSI approval of the license as a
whole. In our opinion, if the three component licenses were approved
only separately, we could not claim that TrueCrypt is distributed under
an OSI-approved license. We need to define relationships between the
component licenses and their domains (for example, the component
licenses use the phrase "this product", which could mislead the
licensee, as none of the component licenses actually applies to the
product as a whole). In our opinion, none of these things could be
achieved if the component licenses were submitted separately.
> You should also templatitize the license
Yes, we already considered that. However, it is impossible to
templatize the whole TrueCrypt Collective License (TCL). The problem is
that the text of the E4M component license cannot be changed, so it
cannot be templatized. We plan to submit the TrueCrypt component
license in a templatized form after the TCL is approved.
Thank you very much for your suggestions.
More information about the License-discuss