question on a BSD-type license
matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu
Tue Jul 29 06:53:06 UTC 2008
Qianqian Fang wrote:
> My question is:
> 1. is this additional clause redundant from the no-liability disclaimer
> in the license?
I don't see why it would be necessary. BSD already disclaims "FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE".
> 2. does this additional contradict with the other terms and invalidate
> the BSD license?
It wouldn't be OSI-approved with that addition. It's probably
compliant, but OSI would be reluctant to approve the modified version.
More information about the License-discuss