Kern Sibbald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 08 June 2007 01:46, Steve Langasek wrote: > > I have seen various FSF FAQs over the years that have claimed that > > distributing binaries linked against OpenSSL is ok, but these FAQs > > have been mute on the matter of distribution as part of an OS. > > > I haven't seen them, but that doesn't surprise me as I don't believe > that FSF ever really wanted to prohibit linking against OpenSSL, and > if they did, they have clearly changed their minds since the GPL v3 > permits it.
I do not think that GPLv3 permits it. The OpenSSL license has the obnoxious advertising clause * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software * must display the following acknowledgement: * "This product includes cryptographic software written by * Eric Young ([EMAIL PROTECTED])" * The word 'cryptographic' can be left out if the rouines from the library * being used are not cryptographic related :-). The current draft of GPLv3 allows some additional provisions such as d. limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or authors of the material; or but nothing like the advertising clause. Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]