From 0d24934aaf49ef0d32f12f6826e877fcc38e0c38 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bryan Stansell Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 15:01:35 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] adjust formatting --- README-LICENSE.md | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-) diff --git a/README-LICENSE.md b/README-LICENSE.md index fc86874..dfa4a23 100644 --- a/README-LICENSE.md +++ b/README-LICENSE.md @@ -20,66 +20,66 @@ has been moved over from the [INSTALL](INSTALL) file: Here's a copy of the message I exchanged with Thomas A. Fine (original author at OSU) in 2001 that is referenced above: -> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:47:18 -0400 (EDT) -> To: bryan@conserver.com -> From: "Thomas A. Fine" -> Subject: Re: A conserver license question... -> -> > Hi Tom, -> > -> > I had a little "problem" crop up that I was hoping you could help me -> > with. A guy out in net-land is trying to put a debian package together -> > of the code I've been releasing (based on your original work) and they -> > don't like part of the Ohio State license. I've attached the message -> > below. -> > -> > I'm not sure what can be done. One thought was a message from you that -> > I could put with the code stating that modifications are ok would -> > work. Or maybe just modifying the original license statement. Heck, I -> > don't even know if either are 100% legal. Maybe I need to talk to -> > someone at Ohio State. -> > -> > Well, if you have any ideas or suggestions, please let me know. Don't -> > know if I ever got a chance to thank you for the great stuff you -> > started! Thank you! ;-) -> -> Well, if I knew then what I know now, I would have copyrighted it -> under my own name, and not under OSU, and then I could change it. -> Since I don't work there anymore, strictly speaking, I can't change -> it. -> -> However, IMHO, this license allows modifications, without explicitly -> stating it. I can state without a doubt that this was my intention -> at the time (and hence, OSU's intention, since I put in the copyright -> while working for OSU). -> -> But also, since it allows use of the source, and since the statement -> required for inclusion says "includes software ..." it seems pretty -> clear that modification was both allowed and expected. You can't -> really use sources if you aren't changing them, and you certainly -> can't include this software in some other product without making -> modifications. -> -> As I recall, I more or less used the copyright that Berkeley was using -> back then for there BSD-related software, so I'm surprised there's a -> problem with it. -> -> I have to point out that version 1.2, available at -> http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/Tech/cs1.2/ -> is distributed entirely without copyright notices. Interesting, no? -> So I guess I could add a copyright notice to that. But would I then -> be violating the OSU copyright that I wrote for 1.1? Since it is -> a different version, I could probably write a new copyright notice -> and license and be free and clear. -> -> There's also Purdue's versions of the software. It's mentioned on my -> console server web page at -> http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/Tech/console-server.html -> -> So, pass this on to the people you're working with and let me know how -> you want to proceed. -> -> tom + Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:47:18 -0400 (EDT) + To: bryan@conserver.com + From: "Thomas A. Fine" + Subject: Re: A conserver license question... + + > Hi Tom, + > + > I had a little "problem" crop up that I was hoping you could help me + > with. A guy out in net-land is trying to put a debian package together + > of the code I've been releasing (based on your original work) and they + > don't like part of the Ohio State license. I've attached the message + > below. + > + > I'm not sure what can be done. One thought was a message from you that + > I could put with the code stating that modifications are ok would + > work. Or maybe just modifying the original license statement. Heck, I + > don't even know if either are 100% legal. Maybe I need to talk to + > someone at Ohio State. + > + > Well, if you have any ideas or suggestions, please let me know. Don't + > know if I ever got a chance to thank you for the great stuff you + > started! Thank you! ;-) + + Well, if I knew then what I know now, I would have copyrighted it + under my own name, and not under OSU, and then I could change it. + Since I don't work there anymore, strictly speaking, I can't change + it. + + However, IMHO, this license allows modifications, without explicitly + stating it. I can state without a doubt that this was my intention + at the time (and hence, OSU's intention, since I put in the copyright + while working for OSU). + + But also, since it allows use of the source, and since the statement + required for inclusion says "includes software ..." it seems pretty + clear that modification was both allowed and expected. You can't + really use sources if you aren't changing them, and you certainly + can't include this software in some other product without making + modifications. + + As I recall, I more or less used the copyright that Berkeley was using + back then for there BSD-related software, so I'm surprised there's a + problem with it. + + I have to point out that version 1.2, available at + http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/Tech/cs1.2/ + is distributed entirely without copyright notices. Interesting, no? + So I guess I could add a copyright notice to that. But would I then + be violating the OSU copyright that I wrote for 1.1? Since it is + a different version, I could probably write a new copyright notice + and license and be free and clear. + + There's also Purdue's versions of the software. It's mentioned on my + console server web page at + http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/Tech/console-server.html + + So, pass this on to the people you're working with and let me know how + you want to proceed. + + tom Hopefully corporations (or, I suppose, their lawyers) will be happy with the explanation above and become comfortable with the stated license.