BSD+1 License

[Bruce Perens]

Stefano Vincenzi wrote:
>     * Source code derived of the original source code, that is 
> distributed as executable code for commercial use, must be made public 
> using this license and other licenses in which the original source 
> code was made public and distributed. 
This doesn't quite parse. I am guessing from the words I see that you 
are not working with an attorney. I appreciate that  you are attempting 
to make a really simple license that is effective. Unfortunately, I 
doubt that it would indeed be effective as written.

To illustrate the possible cost to an Open Source developer of a poorly 
formulated license: I recently participated in the Jacobsen v. Katzer 
lawsuit. Although Jacobsen, the Open Source developer, eventually won, 
he spent about a year's income getting there, had a lot of trouble with 
his employer due to Katzer's actions, and wasted a lot of time over 5 
years, and didn't entirely recover what he lost in the eventual 
settlement. Had he been using something better formulated than the 
Artistic License 1.0, written by Larry Wall without the assistance of an 
attorney, it would have gone more quickly and we could have avoided a 
ruling that was (fortunately, only temporarily) damaging to Open Source. 
In Larry's defense, attorneys weren't volunteering to help us then. They 
are now, please find one and make use of her or him.

I would suggest that you attempt to make the Sleepycat license 
(http://opensource.org/licenses/sleepycat.php) generic, and translate it 
into your selected languages. And please do it with the assistance of an 
attorney.

    Thanks

    Bruce