Re: and yet another license complaint

At 10:14 AM 3/8/2004 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>mark kandianis wrote:
>[...]
> > academic free license is your personal pet?
>
>My "personal pet" is the CPL.
>
> > so to take this discussion onto more positive ground,
> > what is it that you so like about it?
>
>Briefly,
>
>  - it's a contract;
>
>  - derivative works subject to CPL;
>
>  - grant of patent license (it is terminated if recipient
>    institutes patent litigation against licensor or against
>    any entity alleging that the program infringes recipient's
>    patent(s)); http://eclipse.org/legal/legalfaq.html#use_10
>
>  - redistribution of binaries under a different license,
>    even a commercial license, is permitted (but the CPL'd
>    source code must still be made available under the CPL);
>
>  - Commercial distributors/contributors agree to defend and
>    indemnify every other contributor (this obligation does
>    not apply to any claims or losses relating to any actual
>    or alleged intellectual property infringement);
>
>  - CPL'd code may be combined with other licensed code
>    without affecting the other code's license.




thanks for clearing that up.

mark.