mirror of
https://github.com/boostorg/more.git
synced 2024-12-26 23:30:29 +08:00
7a838abbd2
[SVN r34665]
281 lines
14 KiB
HTML
281 lines
14 KiB
HTML
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
|
|
<html>
|
|
|
|
<head>
|
|
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-us">
|
|
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 5.0">
|
|
<meta name="ProgId" content="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
|
|
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html">
|
|
<title>Boost Software License Background</title>
|
|
</head>
|
|
|
|
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
|
|
|
|
<table summary="Navigational header"
|
|
border="1" bgcolor="#007F7F" cellpadding="2">
|
|
<tr>
|
|
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><img src="../boost.png" alt="boost.png (6897 bytes)" width="277" height="86"></td>
|
|
<td><a href="../index.htm"><font face="Arial" color="#FFFFFF"><big>Home</big></font></a></td>
|
|
<td><a href="../libs/libraries.htm"><font face="Arial" color="#FFFFFF"><big>Libraries</big></font></a></td>
|
|
<td><a href="../people/people.htm"><font face="Arial" color="#FFFFFF"><big>People</big></font></a></td>
|
|
<td><a href="faq.htm"><font face="Arial" color="#FFFFFF"><big>FAQ</big></font></a></td>
|
|
<td><a href="index.htm"><font face="Arial" color="#FFFFFF"><big>More</big></font></a></td>
|
|
</tr>
|
|
</table>
|
|
|
|
<h1>Information about the <a href="../LICENSE_1_0.txt">Boost Software License</a> </h1>
|
|
|
|
<p><a href="../LICENSE_1_0.txt">License text</a><br>
|
|
<a href="#Introduction">Introduction</a><br>
|
|
<a href="#History">History</a><br>
|
|
<a href="#Rationale">Rationale</a><br>
|
|
<a href="#FAQ">FAQ</a><br>
|
|
<a href="#Transition">Transition</a><br>
|
|
<a href="#Acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</a></p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="Introduction">Introduction</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>The <a href="../LICENSE_1_0.txt">Boost Software License</a>
|
|
specifies the terms and conditions of use for those Boost libraries
|
|
that it covers.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Currently, some Boost libraries have their own licenses. The hope is that
|
|
eventually all Boost libraries will be covered by the Boost Software
|
|
License. In the meantime, <b>all</b> libraries comply with the <a
|
|
href="#requirements">Boost License requirements</a>.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="History">History</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>As Boost grew, it became unmanageable for each Boost file to have
|
|
its own license. Users complained that each license needed to be reviewed, and that
|
|
reviews were difficult or impossible if Boost libraries contained many different licenses.
|
|
Boost moderators and maintainers spent excessive time dealing with license
|
|
issues. Boost developers often copied existing licenses without actually knowing
|
|
if the license wording met legal needs.</p>
|
|
<p>To clarify these licensing issues, the Boost moderators asked for help from
|
|
the <a href="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu">Berkman Center for Internet & Society</a>
|
|
at Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. It was requested that a
|
|
single Boost license be developed that met the traditional requirements that Boost licenses, particularly:</p>
|
|
|
|
<a name="requirements"></a>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>Must be simple to read and understand. </li>
|
|
<li>Must grant permission without fee to copy, use and modify the software for
|
|
any use (commercial and non-commercial). </li>
|
|
<li>Must require that the license appear with all copies [including
|
|
redistributions] of the software source code. </li>
|
|
<li>Must not require that the license appear with executables or other binary
|
|
uses of the library. </li>
|
|
<li>Must not require that the source code be available for execution or other
|
|
binary uses of the library. </li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<p>Additionally, other common open source licenses were studied to see what
|
|
additional issues were being treated, and additions representing good legal
|
|
practice were also requested. The result is the <a href="../LICENSE_1_0.txt">Boost
|
|
Software License</a>.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="Rationale">Rationale</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>The following rationale was provided by Devin Smith, the
|
|
lawyer who wrote the Boost Software License. It has been edited slightly for
|
|
brevity. Editorial additions are shown in square brackets.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3>Benefit of Common Software License</h3>
|
|
<p>If one of Boost's goals is to ease use and adoption of the various
|
|
libraries made available by Boost, it does make sense to try to
|
|
standardize the licenses under which the libraries are made available to
|
|
users. (I make some recommendations about a possible short-form license
|
|
below.)</p>
|
|
<p>[Standardizing the license will not] necessarily address the issue of satisfying
|
|
corporate licensees. Each corporation will have its own concerns, based
|
|
on their own experiences with software licensing and distribution and,
|
|
if they're careful, will want to carefully review each license, even if
|
|
they've been told that they're all standard. I would expect that,
|
|
unless we're remarkably brilliant (or lucky) in drafting the standard
|
|
Boost license, the standard license won't satisfy the legal departments
|
|
of all corporations. I imagine that some will, for instance, absolutely
|
|
insist that licensors provide a warranty of title and provide
|
|
indemnification for third-party intellectual property infringement
|
|
claims. Others may want functional warranties. (If I were advising the
|
|
corporations, I would point out that they're not paying anything for the
|
|
code and getting such warranties from individual programmers, who
|
|
probably do not have deep pockets, is not that valuable anyway, but
|
|
other lawyers may disagree.)</p>
|
|
<p>But this can be addressed, not by trying to craft the perfect standard
|
|
license, but by informing the corporations that they can, if they don't like the
|
|
standard license, approach the authors to negotiate a different, perhaps even
|
|
paid, license.</p>
|
|
<p>One other benefit of adopting a standard license is to help ensure that
|
|
the license accomplishes, from a legal perspective, what the authors
|
|
intend. For instance, many of the [original] licenses for the libraries available
|
|
on boost.org do not disclaim the warranty of title, meaning that the
|
|
authors could, arguably, be sued by a user if the code infringes the
|
|
rights of a third party and the user is sued by that third party. I
|
|
think the authors probably want to disclaim this kind of liability.</p>
|
|
<h3>Short-Form License</h3>
|
|
<p>Without in anyway detracting from the draft license that's been
|
|
circulated [to Boost moderators], I'd like to propose an alternative "short-form" license that
|
|
Boost could have the library authors adopt. David [Abrahams] has expressed a
|
|
desire to keep things as simple as possible, and to try to move away
|
|
from past practice as little as possible, and this is my attempt at a
|
|
draft.</p>
|
|
<p>This license, which is very similar to the BSD license and the MIT
|
|
license, should satisfy the Open Source Initiative's Open Source
|
|
Definition: (i) the license permits free redistribution, (ii) the
|
|
distributed code includes source code, (iii) the license permits the
|
|
creation of derivative works, (iv) the license does not discriminate
|
|
against persons or groups, (v) the license does not discriminate against
|
|
fields of endeavor, (vi) the rights apply to all to whom the program is
|
|
redistributed, (vii) the license is not specific to a product, and (viii) the
|
|
license is technologically neutral (i.e., it does not [require] an explicit gesture of
|
|
assent in order to establish a contract between licensor and licensee).</p>
|
|
<p>This license grants all rights under the owner's copyrights (as well as an
|
|
implied patent license), disclaims all liability for use of the code (including
|
|
intellectual property infringement liability), and requires that all subsequent
|
|
copies of the code [except machine-executable object code], including partial copies and derivative works, include the
|
|
license.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="FAQ">FAQ</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>How should Boost programmers apply the license to source and
|
|
header files?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Add a comment based on the following template, substituting
|
|
appropriate text for the italicized portion:
|
|
<br>
|
|
<br>
|
|
<pre>
|
|
// Copyright <i>Joe Coder 2004 - 2006</i>.
|
|
// Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
|
|
// (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at
|
|
// http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
|
|
</pre>
|
|
<br>
|
|
Please leave an empty line before and after the above comment block.
|
|
It is fine if the copyright and license messages are not on different lines; in
|
|
no case there should be other intervening text. Do not include
|
|
"All rights reserved" anywhere.<br>
|
|
|
|
<p>Other ways of licensing source files have been considered, but some
|
|
of them turned out to unintentionally nullify legal elements of the
|
|
license. Having fixed language for referring to the license helps
|
|
corporate legal departments evaluate the boost distribution.
|
|
Creativity in license reference language is strongly discouraged, but
|
|
judicious changes in the use of whitespace are fine.
|
|
|
|
<p><b>How should the license be applied to documentation files, instead?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Very similarly to the way it is applied to source files: the user should
|
|
see the very same text indicated in the template above, with the only difference
|
|
that both the local and the web copy of LICENSE_1_0.txt should be linked to.
|
|
Refer to the HTML source code of this page in case of doubt.
|
|
|
|
<p>Note that the location of the local LICENSE_1_0.txt needs to be indicated
|
|
relatively to the position of your documentation file
|
|
(<code>../LICENSE_1_0.txt</code>, <code>../../LICENSE_1_0.txt</code> etc.)</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>How is the Boost license different from the
|
|
<a href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/gpl-license.php">GNU General Public
|
|
License (GPL)</a>?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for
|
|
commercial or non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release
|
|
your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring
|
|
reproduction of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and
|
|
the fact that the Boost license is not "viral": if you
|
|
distribute your own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license
|
|
applies only to the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you
|
|
are free to license your own code under any terms you like. The GPL is
|
|
also much longer, and thus may be harder to understand.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Why the phrase "machine-executable object code generated by a source
|
|
language processor"?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>To distinguish cases where we do not require reproduction of the copyrights
|
|
and license, such as object libraries, shared libraries, and final program
|
|
executables, from cases where reproduction is still required, such as
|
|
distribution of self-extracting archives of source code or precompiled header
|
|
files. More detailed wording was rejected as not being legally necessary, and
|
|
reducing readability.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Why is the "disclaimer" paragraph of the license entirely in uppercase?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Capitalization of these particular provisions is a US legal mandate for
|
|
consumer protection. (Diane Cabell)</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Does the copyright and license cover interfaces too?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>The conceptual interface to a library isn't covered. The particular
|
|
representation expressed in the header is covered, as is the documentation,
|
|
examples, test programs, and all the other material that goes with the library.
|
|
A different implementation is free to use the same logical interface, however.
|
|
Interface issues have been fought out in court several times; ask a lawyer for
|
|
details.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Why doesn't the license prohibit the copyright holder from patenting the
|
|
covered software?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>No one who distributes their code under the terms of this license could turn
|
|
around and sue a user for patent infringement. (Devin Smith)</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Boost's lawyers were well aware of patent provisions in licenses like the GPL
|
|
and CPL, and would have included such provisions in the Boost license if they
|
|
were believed to be legally useful.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Why doesn't the copyright message say "All rights reserved"?</b></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Devin Smith says "I don't think it belongs in the copyright notice for
|
|
anything (software, electronic documentation, etc.) that is being licensed. It
|
|
belongs in books that are sold where, in fact, all rights (e.g., to reproduce
|
|
the book, etc.) are being reserved in the publisher or author. I think it
|
|
shouldn't be in the BSD license."</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Do I have to copyright/license trivial files?</b>
|
|
|
|
<p>Even a test file that just contains an empty <code>main()</code>
|
|
should have a copyright. Files without copyrights make corporate
|
|
lawyers nervous, and that's a barrier to adoption. The more of Boost
|
|
is uniformly copyrighted and licensed, the less problem people will
|
|
have with mounting a Boost release CD on a corporate server.
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Can I use the Boost license for my own projects outside Boost?</b>
|
|
|
|
<p>Sure; there are no restrictions on the use of the license itself.
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="Transition">Transition</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>To ease the transition of the code base towards the new common
|
|
license, several people decided to give a <a
|
|
href="blanket-permission.txt">blanket permission</a> for all
|
|
their contributions to use the new license. This hopefully helps
|
|
maintainers to switch to the new license once the list contains enough
|
|
names without asking over and over again for each change. Please
|
|
consider adding your name to the list.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="Acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</a></h2>
|
|
<p>Dave Abrahams led the Boost effort to develop better licensing. The legal
|
|
team was led by
|
|
<a href="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/cabell/index.html">Diane Cabell</a>,
|
|
Director, Clinical Programs, <a href="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu">Berkman
|
|
Center for Internet & Society</a>, Harvard Law School.
|
|
<a href="http://www.nixonpeabody.com/attorneys_detail1.asp?ID=121">Devin Smith</a>, attorney, <a href="http://www.nixonpeabody.com/default.asp">
|
|
Nixon Peabody LLP</a>, wrote the Boost License. Eva Chan, Harvard Law School,
|
|
contributed analysis of Boost issues and drafts of various legal documents.
|
|
Boost members reviewed drafts of the license. Beman Dawes wrote this web page.</p>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<p>Revised
|
|
<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" S-Type="EDITED" S-Format="%d %B, %Y" startspan -->27 August, 2004<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" endspan i-checksum="39365" --></p>
|
|
|
|
<p> © Copyright 2003-2004 Beman Dawes, Daniel Frey, David Abrahams.</p>
|
|
<p> Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
|
|
(See accompanying file <a href="../LICENSE_1_0.txt">LICENSE_1_0.txt</a> or
|
|
copy at <a href="http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt">www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt</a>)
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
</body>
|
|
|
|
</html>
|