On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:32, Sergio Belkin <sebelk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > My name is Sergio Belkin I maintain UpTools package. That package has > a License that has 4 clauses and because of that I get confused and > labeld as "BSD with advertising". But a closer read of "BSD with > advertising" at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#What.27s_the_deal_with_the_BSD_with_advertising_license.3F > makes to understand that is the License that we are using is not "BSD > with advertising". Anyway I wonder if even that has 4 clauses it's a > "BSD" license. I've found that cyrus-sasl has the same license and its > license it was as "BSD" but maintainer changed the tag License, surely > because of a bug I reported. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=679416 > > But again, seeing more deeply it doesn't seem "BSD with advertising". > > In short: Please could you tell me if the following License can be > tagged as "BSD" i.e. BSD License (no advertising) > The clause that causes GPL problems in the original BSD was the following license terms: 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley and its contributors. That would seem equivalent to > * 4. Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following > * acknowledgment: 'This product includes software developed by the > * "Universidad de Palermo, Argentina" (http://www.palermo.edu/).' so it would seem that your software is BSD with advertising clause. -- Stephen J Smoogen. "The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance." Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University. "Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle." -- Ian MacLaren _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
