On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 01:01:10AM -0600, R Hill wrote: > > Removing these files and relying on LICENSE=foo in the ebuild could be seen > > as > > a copyright violation. There are lots of samples in /usr/src/licenses that > > aren't generic, but include a copyright notice naming the authors of a > > particular piece of software, but it doesn't match with all packages under > > this license of course. Take ZLIB as example. Since I'm not a lawyer I > > might > > be wrong, but me thinks it would make sense to ask one. > > AFAIK most licenses need to be included with the distribution of the source, > not > installed on the system after compilation. But I could be wrong too.
There are exceptions, a popular one being BSD.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
* documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
As a quick example, iputils is BSD-licensed and does not install or
reproduce its license, so does this cause problems for iputils binpkgs?
pgp6nvBCbR8Qu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
