Questions about the two-clause BSD license
des at des.no
Mon Oct 19 14:35:41 UTC 2009
Pimm Hogeling <pimmhogeling at gmail.com> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des at des.no> writes:
> > Did you ever stop to think that most people will find it simpler to
> > include the copyright and license statement with the binary than to
> > make the source code available "in the same way through the same
> > place"?
> Yes, obviously including the notice is easier than providing the
> source code, and will be less of a problem to proprietary software
> developers. However, some developers will provide the source code of
> their project, anyway. They will have to do both, since providing the
> source code does not excuse the developer from the binary form-clause.
> I'm just saying I think doing only one of them is enough, whichever
> that is.
If they distribute the source code with the binary, that is sufficient.
If they don't, they should include the license in the binary
distribution. I don't find that requirement unreasonable, nor is it
particularly hard to comply with. I can name half a dozen Fortune 1000
companies, several of them in the top 100, that are perfectly
comfortable with it.
You're boxing with shadows.
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des at des.no
More information about the License-discuss