Hmmm… I could almost see this being added as a new license altogether or and exception (to BSD-3-Clause). Anyone have strong feelings on whether it should be one or the other?
Jilayne On Nov 25, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Sam Ellis <sam.el...@arm.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I’d like to ask for a new license exception to be considered for addition to > the SPDX license list. > > The exception text is: > > The license below extends only to copyright in the software and shall > not be construed as granting a license to any other intellectual > property including but not limited to intellectual property relating > to a hardware implementation of the functionality of the software > licensed hereunder. You may use the software subject to the license > terms below provided that you ensure that this notice is replicated > unmodified and in its entirety in all distributions of the software, > modified or unmodified, in source code or in binary form. > > This is usually found prefixed in front of a BSD license. It is found > extensively in the gem5 open source project, and here is an example of > use:http://repo.gem5.org/gem5/file/021524c21cbc/src/cpu/exec_context.cc > > As for a possible names, how about “SW-only-exception” short form, and > “Software-Only Exception” full form? > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the > contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the > information in any medium. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > Spdx-legal mailing list > Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org > https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
_______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
