BSD and MIT license "compliance" with the MS-PL
andrew.wilson at intel.com
Fri Apr 17 18:40:29 UTC 2009
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>> Perhaps the MS-PL license was not
>> accidently named and appropriately categorized as a permissive weak-copyleft
>> open source license.
> Where is it categorized as copyleft (besides the FSF list)?
MS-PL was categorized as copyleft during the discussions on
OSI approval. That was actually one of the key arguments in
favor of approval, since a weak copyleft, permissive license
is non-duplicative of BSD/MIT/Apache et al. Were it not read as
weak copyleft, I doubt it would have been approved. Certainly,
the intent of 3(D) appears to be that MS-PL applies to any source
derivatives of an original MS-PL work
(and thus such derivatives could not, for example, be GPL'd).
Back on the original topic, I don't see any reason to believe
BSD or MIT code could not be combined with MS-PL code.
Intel open source technology center
More information about the License-discuss