For Approval: TrueCrypt Collective License Version 2.0

Wilson, Andrew andrew.wilson at
Wed Jul 12 22:10:49 UTC 2006

Tomas Novak wrote: 

> lrosen at wrote:

>> The entire SpikeSource stack is distributed as a collective work
>> under a single OSL 3.0 license. Individual components of that stack
>> (including Linux, MySQL, JBoss, Apache, and Python/PHP/Perl) are
>> licensed by their authors under a variety of other open source (and
>> a very few binary) licenses. Some of those stack components require
>> additional licenses for commercial use, but that's explained up
>> front so users aren't surprised.
>> What's the problem you're trying to solve?
> Hi Larry,
> In our opinion, such a collective work (which is similar, e.g., to a 
> magazine or newspaper) is substantially different from our work. In
> case you mentioned, there are several identifiably separate products
> it is a collection of clearly separate products. The user will 
> naturally, and rightfully, expect that each of the products is made 
> available to him or her under a single license (possibly different
> the license covering the other products in the collection). However,
> have a single product (from the user's point of view) so when the user

> reads the phrase "this product" in one of the component licenses, he
> she will very likely (and understandably) believe that the term of the

> license applies to the whole product, which is not true.

Perhaps this is a better example: Most large-scale open source products
such as Firefox and MySQL are built with reused SW components which may
different licenses from the main body of the project's code.  
I don't see how TrueCrypt is in any way unique in this
regard.  For TrueCrypt original code, you should consider a license 
(Apache 2.0 seems like a good choice) which restricts downstream users
from employing your trademarks without permission, and writing a README 
or COPYING file which spells out the licensing on 
all the reused SW components.

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center

More information about the License-discuss mailing list