On 31 Mar, 09:36, Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't have a printed copy, but Google Books has it (not sure which > edition I found) and page xix says: > > Given the nature of the cookbook, we wanted the recipes to be usable under > any circumstances where Python could be used. In other words, we wanted to > ensure completely unfettered use, in the same spirit as the Python license. > Unfortunately, the Python license cannot really be used to refer to > anything other than Python itself. As a compromise, we chose to use the > modified Berkeley license, which is considered the most liberal of > licenses. ... and then the license follows ... > > So, if the recipe is in the printed cookbook the licensing is clear > (primarily you must retain the copyright notice).
The best advice I've found so far is the following: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html It spells out exactly what you have to do to satisfy the original licence and to uphold your own licence choice. It's also written by well-regarded legal people. Paul P.S. An older and more ambiguous conclusion on the topic can be found here: http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/msg/4c8b3114c35df368 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list