How about adding some weasel words, or even simply making the
attribution requirement a "should"? I think it's perfectly reasonable
to ask for attribution when possible, so any form of words that
doesn't "break" the BSD license in a narrow legalistic sense
would do fine for me.
It's not like we're asking for much:
# This code was derived from IETF RFC XXXX. Please retain this comment if possible.
Brian
On 2008-08-13 03:07, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> As someone who always prefers the BSD license, I agree with Simon on #1
> and #2. Saying "BSD except..." means it is a new type of license, one
> that typical implementers will not expect.
>
> One way to look at this is to consider what happens if someone treats
> this as a real BSD license and doesn't give attribution. Is the IETF
> Trust really going to sue them over the lack of attribution? If not, why
> even have that addition to the BSD license? Like in our technical
> protocols, simplicity is good here.
>
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf