[ENet-discuss] License question

[Nuno Silva]

The problem with that approach is that if you ever get in legal issues with
your software (just a shot in the dark, that probably won't ever happen),
nobody will accept "They let me do it this way" legally, unless you have it
written by the authors of those libraries, because of the ever-so-wonderful
"legalese". So you could get in bigger problems than you already were.

You can always of course just add a reference to enet and a link to its
license in case you don't want to "bloat your software with text files".

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Philip Bennefall <philip at blastbay.com>wrote:

>  I understand this. My question was more along the lines of whether the
> approach I have taken is acceptable to Lee, or whether he feels that it is
> important to include the actual licensing text. I have asked similar
> questions regarding other libraries with the same license and they have not
> had a problem with my text, so I just wanted to make sure in this case. I
> really don't like to bloat my software with legal disclaimers and licenses
> if I can help it, so I avoid the LGPL and BSD style licenses for instance.
>
> Another thing I am pondering is whether the paragraph refers to the source
> code, or compiled object code as well.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Philip Bennefall
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Nuno Silva <little.coding.fox at gmail.com>
> *To:* philip at blastbay.com ; Discussion of the ENet library<enet-discuss at cubik.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, March 25, 2011 6:37 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [ENet-discuss] License question
>
> When dealing with license text you must go literal with every single word.
> It says you must include the copyright notice _and_ the permission notice
> you are reading, so your approach is legally "incorrect". An easy way to
> solve this would be to just include a text file with both notices in your
> software package, e.g., "Enet.txt".
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Philip Bennefall <philip at blastbay.com>wrote:
>
>>  Hi Lee,
>>
>> I just had a quick question for you regarding the ENet license, to make
>> sure I am doing things correctly. With the following statement:
>>
>>
>> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
>> all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you refer to the source code, or must binary applications that use ENet
>> include the license? Currently I have a statement like this in my
>> documentation (including a link to the website):
>>
>>
>>
>> The ENet Project <http://enet.bespin.org/>
>> ENet is a rock solid layer on top of the UDP protocol, optimized
>> especially for high-speed games. This is what BGT uses to provide its
>> networking capabilities.
>>
>> Is this acceptable? Or am I required to add the full legal text? I much
>> prefer the above notice to the complete license.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Philip Bennefall
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ENet-discuss mailing list
>> ENet-discuss at cubik.org
>> http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ENet-discuss mailing list
> ENet-discuss at cubik.org
> http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cubik.org/pipermail/enet-discuss/attachments/20110325/7441f18a/attachment-0001.html>