[License-discuss] Thoughts on AAL and OSS vs FOSS

[Richard Fontana]

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:08 AM Syed Arsalan Hussain Shah
<arsalan at buddyexpress.net> wrote:
>
> The alternative license besides AAL could be the CAL1.0 that has been approved recently.
>
> > You must retain all licensing, authorship, or attribution notices contained in the Source Code (the “Notices”), and provide all such Notices to each Recipient, together with a statement acknowledging the use of the Work. Notices may be provided directly to a Recipient or via an easy-to-find hyperlink to an Internet location also providing Access to Source Code.
>
> https://github.com/holochain/cryptographic-autonomy-license#43-provide-notices-and-attribution
>
> From this I assume  if someone adds an attribution notice in the source code like 'developed by abc' the user using the software need to display such a notice as it is part of source code.

I am pretty sure this is not correct. Your interpretation seems to be
directly contradicted by the license language you quoted, in
particular the second sentence.

Richard