On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:08 AM Syed Arsalan Hussain Shah <arsa...@buddyexpress.net> wrote: > > The alternative license besides AAL could be the CAL1.0 that has been > approved recently. > > > You must retain all licensing, authorship, or attribution notices contained > > in the Source Code (the “Notices”), and provide all such Notices to each > > Recipient, together with a statement acknowledging the use of the Work. > > Notices may be provided directly to a Recipient or via an easy-to-find > > hyperlink to an Internet location also providing Access to Source Code. > > https://github.com/holochain/cryptographic-autonomy-license#43-provide-notices-and-attribution > > From this I assume if someone adds an attribution notice in the source code > like 'developed by abc' the user using the software need to display such a > notice as it is part of source code.
I am pretty sure this is not correct. Your interpretation seems to be directly contradicted by the license language you quoted, in particular the second sentence. Richard _______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
