[boost] Re: Call for Volunteers [license review]

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-11 18:09:40

Carl Daniel wrote:
[...]
> The IBM license is lengthy and unusual, in that that majority of it appears
> to place restrictions on contributors to, not recipeients of the software.

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-cplfaq.html

<quote>

1. Company X contributes the initial code and documentation distributed 
   under the CPL. For example, the initial Eclipse code was contributed 
   by IBM. Therefore, under the CPL, IBM is the initial Contributor and 
   the initial Eclipse code is referred to both as IBM's Contribution, 
   the initial code, and the Program.

2. Company A redistributes the Program without changing or adding to it. 
   Under the CPL, Company A is considered a Contributor.

3. Company A changes or adds to the Program. Company A is a subsequent 
   Contributor and the change or addition is a Contribution and becomes 
   part of the Program.

4. Company A creates a software module to be distributed in conjunction 
   with the Program under its own license agreement. The module is not 
   derived from the Program itself. The software module is not 
   considered a Contribution and is not subject to the terms of the CPL.

5. Company B downloads the Program from the Eclipse.org Web site. 
   Company B is a Recipient. Under the terms of the CPL, each 
   Contributor grants to Company B and other Recipients a royalty-free 
   license to the Contributor's Contributions to the Program.

</quote>

Hth,

regards,
alexander.