Subject: Re: Which license is recommended?
From: Alan Rihm <alan@rihm.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:06:44 -0500

If we put our copyright notice in the UI, would that address the issue?

Does the Adaptive Public License address this issue 
(http://opensource.org/licenses/apl1.0.php)?

How about the Apple Public Source License 
(http://opensource.org/licenses/apsl-2.0.php)?


Russell Nelson wrote:

>Alan Rihm writes:
> > Please recommend a license that does the following:
> > 
> > Requires any of our notices, including our "Powered By" tag, to remain 
> > in the UI (and source code) of our software.
>
>There is no already-approved license which does that.  In order to
>accomplish that you'll have to assert that your copyright covers
>public performances (that is to say, construction of a web page).
>Copyright law gives you control over that, although I don't know of
>anybody who actually tries to control it.  You might find people
>resistant to the idea, and since you WANT people to use your code, you
>might not be successful.
>
>You'll need to contact a lawyer.
>
>There's certainly precedent for language that requires the non-removal
>of notices; the GPL requires that an interactive program print its
>copyright and GPL permission notice when it starts up.
>
>  
>