Re: Copyright notice for demo source headers

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Mon Mar 08 2004 - 13:01:10 CST

On Monday, March 8, 2004, at 01:21 PM, Alan Dechert wrote:
> Here is what Fred wrote to me. I don't think I'm the right person to
> answer
> this.
> We need a header for the sources that states the
> explicit copyright. ...100% GPL compatible

In the previous long discussion, we had agreed on the EVMPL. I wrote a
detailed letter to the FSF to get their opinion on that license (i.e.
is it GPL compatible and/or a "Free Software license"). Unfortunately,
it took several months to get a response, and after that time it was an
annoying form letter to the effect: "Free Software is good; read our
website." Did I post that? (either way, it wasn't helpful).

The EVMPL may now be found at:

Which I think is a good reference URL for headers.

Doug Jones asked for the additional clause in the EVMPL; however, I
think at the time we were not considering linking with (as opposed to
just using) any GPL'd software. I think now we link to Qt under GPL,
which binds our derived software. I would recommend adding a second
"clarification" in the EVMPL header:

   2nd Clarification:

     If the revision history condition of the EVMPL is determined
     to be incompatible with the GPL for distribution of GPL-linked
     software, this condition may be treated as an advisory request
     rather than as a binding condition within that linked software.

Given this, I can't imagine our license to be non-GPL-compatible, since
it just says the GPL takes precedence over our clause.

Absent any objection, I guess I'll update the above URL to point to, which I've created just now.

= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Wed Mar 31 23:17:03 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Mar 31 2004 - 23:17:12 CST