Subject: Re: For Approval: The Kannel Software License, Version 1.0
From: Stipe Tolj <st@tolj.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:32:16 +0200

Wilson, Andrew wrote:
> 
> May I respectfully suggest that you simply consider using the
> Apache 2.0 license, verbatim?  The 2.0 license has been "template-ized"
> in that specific references to Apache have been dropped, and it instead
> refers generically to "licensor" (i.e. the copyright owner who has
> applied
> the Apache 2.0 license to the code).
> 
> Apache 2.0 also contains several other improvements over 1.1, such as a
> patent grant with defensive termination, and a clarification
> that -- unless explicitly stated otherwise -- bug fixes, enhancements,
> and other derivatives of Apache 2.0 code are also licensed under Apache
> 2.0.

which would imply that we as the development group would not be able to 
add/modify portions of that template-ized license from ASF, right?

That may be a problem IMO.

Generally we already talked internally and even with ASF to integrate Kannel to 
ASF as an own sub-project. This proposal fail due to vetos of Kannel developers. 
I do assume that they would also veto against a "template-ized" lincense 
approach, since they would like to keep the control of the the whole thing.

So as a first approach, I'd consider heading towards the "own" license formula.

Nevertheless, I'll trigger this kind suggestion from your side into the group 
and will see what quotes will bounce.

Stipe

mailto:stolj_{at}_wapme.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG

Vogelsanger Weg 80
40470 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany

phone: +49.211.74845.0
fax: +49.211.74845.299

mailto:info_{at}_wapme-systems.de
http://www.wapme-systems.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------