matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu
Wed Jan 21 20:00:30 UTC 2009
Steve Thomas wrote:
> Thanks for all your replies. They've all been helpful.
> Randall > I think you may want to look at the RPL-Reciprocal Public
> License-I think it may be close to what you want.
> I would like "reciprocity" in the following sense: if and when parties
> make derivations or compound derivations of my code available, they
> should be on the same terms as my own original code.
This is copyleft, not permissive. Any permissive license allows new
code to be under a different license. I fail to see how you could draft
a license that is both copyleft and permissive.
> Nigel > MPL might be the closest in what he wants.
> I haven't had time to look yet. I'll do this, then start
Perhaps. MPL is not a permissive license in any sense, though. It's a
weak copyleft. Changes to existing files (or new files that contain
content from old files) must be released under MPL. However, new files
can have other licenses and/or be binary-only.
More information about the License-discuss