Legacy Approval - BlackBox Component Builder Open Source License

[John Cowan]

Treutwein Bernhard scripsit:
> as an interested licensee, I would like to apply for approval of the
> 
> 	>>The BlackBox Component Builder Open Source License<<
> 
> as far as I can see this is a BSD type license and therefore an
> approved license.

Not at all.  This is a reciprocal license with BSD roots.  In fact,
it's the Sleepycat License (which is an approved Open Source license)
with the redundancies removed.  The first three clauses and the
DISCLAIMER are straight from the main part of the Sleepycat License.
The SL also includes a pair of 3-clause BSD licenses, one from UC and
one from Harvard.  This license keeps the non-redundant no-endorsement
clause and jettisons the rest of the two BSD licenses.  It also changes
"DB software" to just "Software".

Just make sure when you distribute larger works that incorporate the
licensed work that you provide source for them, as you would for GPLed
works.  Unlike the case of the GPL, you don't have to distribute your
larger work under this license; any reasonable terms permitting free
redistribution will serve.

Generally we discourage new reciprocal licenses, because they create
a tiny commons separate from the main permissive and GPL commonses.
For legacy purposes, though, I don't see any material differences from
the SL here, and think you can treat this as a variant.

I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice, but it is not the
unauthorized practice of law, either.

-- 
If you have ever wondered if you are in hell,         John Cowan
it has been said, then you are on a well-traveled     http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
road of spiritual inquiry.  If you are absolutely     cowan at ccil.org
sure you are in hell, however, then you must be
on the Cross Bronx Expressway.          --Alan Feuer, NYTimes, 2002-09-20