Re: [ng-spice] Draft letter to Sangiovanni Vincentelli
Francesco Doni wrote:
> About the license problem, though I'm not an expert on the subject,
> I would point out what I think the other side of the coin.
> I agree with the several who wrote about using spice code,
> for istance Reid van Melle:
> >In fact, you are free to use pieces of Spice code in your
> >own simulator and change the license to whatever you wish.
> >This is exactly what hundred of companies have been doing
> >for years (commercial licenses) resulting in a plethora of Spice
> >versions in the marketplace.
>
> The Berkeley issue allow you to change, add or what else and then
> sell YOUR product provided few things that I report hereafter
> (a) The licensee agrees not to charge for the University of Cal-
> ifornia code itself. The licensee may, however, charge for
> additions, extensions, or support.
> (b) In any product based on the software, the licensee agrees to
> acknowledge the research group that developed the software.
> This acknowledgment shall appear in the product documenta-
> tion.
> (c) The licensee agrees to obey all U.S. Government restrictions
> governing redistribution or export of the software and docu-
> mentation.
> (d) For software with additional restrictions (any software
> listed in Section 2), the licensee agrees to all additional
> terms governing distribution of that software.
> (e) The licensee agree to reproduce any copyright notice which
> appears on the software and documentation provided under
> this agreement on any copy or modification of such made
> available to others by licensee.
>
> The main problem I think we could have and at Berkeley
> could underline is not the license itself but the overall issue to
> comply with the Export Administration Regulations,
No - AFAIK there are no problems with that regarding the spice program.
The main incompatibility between this licence and the GPL is clause b)
(and apparently also clause a which isn't a usual clause in Berkeley
software, but I could be wrong)
> Is the Berkeley license to interfere with the GNU one or
> vice versa, I believe in the second option.
> The GNU software, which could be invaluable for our purpose,
> has strict license terms.
the real question is: will they agree to release their software under the
terms
of the 'new style' BSD licence? If they do, then no problem.
manu
Partial thread listing:
- Re: [ng-spice] Draft letter to Sangiovanni Vincentelli, (continued)
Letter to Prof. Vincentelli Draft 2
Paolo Nenzi