[Boost-users] Re: about license

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-26 20:40:38

"Victor A. Wagner Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]> writes:

> At Tuesday 2004-02-24 18:42, you wrote:
>>Marleny Rafferty <marleny_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>> > Hi-
>> >
>> > I am considering using boost in my applications, but I have a question
>> > about the boost license at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt .  It
>> > says (edited) "Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to ...
>> > use [and] reproduce ... the Software".
>> >
>> > It also says that any derivative works must also have the same license
>> > grant.
>> >
>> > If my application uses boost libraries unchanged, is it considered a
>> > derivative work?
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>> > If so, does that mean that if I distribute my compiled software, I
>> > must allow free of charge use and distribution?
>>
>>No, the license gives an explicit exemption for compiled code
>>(emphasis mine):
>>
>>all derivative works of the Software, UNLESS SUCH COPIES OR DERIVATIVE
>>WORKS ARE SOLELY IN THE FORM OF MACHINE-EXECUTABLE OBJECT CODE GENERATED BY
>>A SOURCE LANGUAGE PROCESSOR.
>
> Your interpretation says a copy of the source must be "free to use and
> reproduce" but the compiled output not.
>
> 1) I don't belive it

a. I don't believe you don't believe it.

> 2) I don't believe that's enforceable

b. I don't believe you can prove you don't believe it.

That was exactly the interpretation we asked the lawyers who worked
with us to encode in the license, so I don't know why you'd doubt me.
The lawyers are very good at their jobs.

> 3) who is protected by this?  Certainly not anyone trying to USE the
> library.

c. The authors who intended the source code to remain freely usable, and
the boost goal that there be no barriers to free use of the software.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com