Re: [boost] Re: Help with legal audit (yes - this is directed to boost!)

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-29 13:46:59

From: <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
> --- In boost_at_y..., "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_m...> wrote:
> > From: <williamkempf_at_h...>
> >
> > > I'd go a step further and require a license.txt file for each
> > > library, UNLESS the library uses a (hypothetical) standard Boost
> > > license.
> >
> > ... *and* doesn't depend on libraries that don't use the
> hypothetical
> > standard Boost license.
>
> Point taken.
>
> > This isn't really going to save time, though. Every source file
> still needs
> > to be inspected.
>
> Why?

I am definitely not a lawyer but it looks to me that _not_ having a
license.txt file doesn't really have any legal meaning. If a particular
source file has an embedded license it will override the "no license.txt"
implied license.

--
Peter Dimov
Multi Media Ltd.