thankyou Guy and Loris for responding to my query and clarifying the thread of licences. I am assuming from what you say that I cannot re-distribute WinPcap and WinDump legally unless I mention the respective statements in "all" descriptions of the Windows Toolbox project, which sadly is too great a burdon on the readibility of our documentation in some situations for us to be able to include the software. Which is a shame, even ore so as people from this list are now mailing me with other interesting software that relies upon WinpCap
>From what I read about some people willing to change their 3rd clause and others >potentially willing to do so if only they could be contacted, and tho its an ugly thing to do, I'm tempted to ask what people think of the legal and ethical implications of my distributing anyway and only mentioning the 3rd clause text in our licence, copyright statements, central list of software included and including WinpCap/WinDump's full licence in their respective directories. However, if this approach was worth considering, and with the proviso that the software would be removed if any copyright holder objected, I don't want to foist the burden of an infrigment upon other people who might wish to themselves re-distribute the Windows Toolbox - I want it to be as free from obligations and implications for others as possible, so that they can rest assured every effort has been made to protect them against legal recourse (perhaps, for those wishing to and able, it would be worth removing the 3rd clause from some of the code so that it didn't put its increased licence implications on people potentially re-using that code in the future, as has happened with that of libpcap and tcpdump) pete ================================================================== This is the WinPcap users list. It is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To unsubscribe use mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==================================================================
