OsLib licence

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 11 Feb 2003, in message <8e763ec34b.tom at compton.compton.nu>,
Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu> wrote:

> In message <19bf22c34b.colin at colin/granville.gmx.co.uk> you wrote:
> 
> > I've been looking into oslib and am totally confused by your GPL
> > with exclusion clause.
> 
[snip]
> 
Colin, if you have a specific problem with complying with the licence, let us
know the details, and we'll try to help you out. We have had a handful of
specific queries over the years, which have all been satisfactorily resolved,
but in general people seem to handle the not very onerous conditions quite
well.

I think the definitive answer to your query is on the OSLib web page at
Sourceforge, dealing copyright issues, where it clearly states that the
contents of specific source directories fall under the (relaxed) GPL. That
includes sources authored by Jonathan, Tom, myself, and others. The page is
signed by myself, and its authority should be good enough for you.

FYI, Anyone who has contributed to OSLib will either have implicitly done so
under the terms of the licence, or we (i.e. Jonathan, and his successors in
the OSLib team) would have obtained specific authority from those who
contributed *before* the current licence conditions were applied. 

However, this should only be of concern to us, the OSLib team; as far as the
users are concerned, the cover-all statement on the web page should be
perfectly adequate, and clear.

I do not believe there can be any doubt on this issue.

Cheers, Tony

-- 
Tony van der Hoff         | MailTo:tony at mk-net.demon.co.uk
                          | MailTo:avanderhoff at iee.org
Buckinghamshire, England  | http:www.mk-net.demon.co.uk