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(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf