> Barring any objections from the copyright holder(s), I will in good > faith construe Randomizer.cpp's license as being the same as > OpenSSL's license except with the false advertising clauses removed, > and consequently, compatible with the GNU GPL. > > Josh
The OpenSSL license says: * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. But the GPL says: "2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:" None of the conditions listed say anything about retaining some other list of conditions from some other license. The GPL then says: "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." Sorry, the license is not GPL-compatible. The GPL permits distrubtion of modified versions without any requirement to keep some other list of conditions and disclaimer intact, but the OpenSSL license imposes that requirement. It's the same as if the OpenSSL license prohibited any other kind of modification that the GPL allowed. For example, you cannot place something under the GPL that outputs "David Schwartz is the best, all must kneel before him" to your system log every time you run it and add a license clause that you must leave that intact. The OpenSSL conditions and disclaimers are equally foreign to the GPL. DS ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
