[License-discuss] step by step interpretation of common permissive licenses

Massimo Zaniboni massimo.zaniboni at asterisell.com
Wed Jan 18 08:50:21 UTC 2017

On 18/01/2017 09:01, David Woolley wrote:

> Not entirely true. Only significant changes are owned by B. De minis and
> obvious changes don't attract an independent copyright.


> More generally on this topic, the requirement to include the copyright
> and licence in the permissive licences is only really codifying best
> practice.  That's especially true for open source derivatives, where the
> implied warranty that the supplier has the right to issue the end user
> licence, or even distribute the software, is being waived.

Sincerely I don't fully understand this sentence. Are you saying that if 
license A allows me to use, modify and distribuite the code of product A 
(like BSD, and ISC are saying), then is it implicit by common laws that 
I can distribuite the software using my license terms?

This will simplify a lot the interpretation of BSD and ISC licenses.

More information about the License-discuss mailing list