Odd licenses

[Warren Togami]

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 02:43:50PM -0500, Andrew Overholt wrote:
>> adaptx license.txt
>> [2]
>> http://svn.codehaus.org/castor/adaptx/trunk/src/doc/license.txt
> 
> This seems to be BSD-like to me. There is condition that I dislike,
> because it doesn't have an obvious meaning (a clause similar is often
> seen on scientific packages):
> 
> 5. Due credit should be given to the ExoLab Group (http://www.exolab.org).
> 
> It doesn't explain when credit is "due", how credit should be given.
> Is it for the use, the redistribution, both? I don't think this is a
> blocker, though. My interpretation is that having this license in the 
> package is enough.
> 

"should" is also open to interpretation.  It makes it sound like a 
suggestion but not a requirement.

The key question of whether this is GPL compatible or not, is if this 
counts as an "additional requirement" or not.  It is unclear if this is 
even a requirement.

Warren Togami
wtogami at redhat.com