On 1/5/15, 1:56 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >I've made the changes to NOTICE and LICENSE for saxon9 but there may be a >further legal issue we need to resolve. The James Clark license is >MIT/X11 (or similar) license with an anti advertising clause. I think >this is a reaction to the BSD license with the advertising clause and >should be OK but not 100% sure. IMO, it isn’t a reaction but either way I think we’re ok. [1][2] don’t place any restrictions on the variants of MIT licenses, and [4] says the text you call an “anti-advertising” clause is in some of these variants. -Alex > >1.http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps >2. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a >3. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:MIT?rd=Licensing/MIT
