Python license (2.3)

[Robert Kern]

Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 2005-04-12, Robert Kern schreef <rkern at ucsd.edu>:
> 
>>Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What licence can I use? Somewhere they say you can combine python
>>>code with GPL code. Does that mean that the resulting code has
>>>to have both the GPL license as the PSF license, as both seem
>>>to want that derived work uses the same license.
>>
>>No, the PSF does not want that. It does not say so anywhere in the 
>>license text. Yes, you can GPL the derived work. The licenses are 
>>compatible.
>>
> 
> 
> This comes from the license text.
> 
> | 2. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License Agreement, PSF
> | hereby grants Licensee a nonexclusive, royalty-free, world-wide
> | license to reproduce, analyze, test, perform and/or display publicly,
> | prepare derivative works, distribute, and otherwise use Python 2.3
> | alone or in any derivative version, provided, however, that PSF's
> | License Agreement and PSF's notice of copyright, i.e., "Copyright (c)
> | 2001, 2002, 2003 Python Software Foundation; All Rights Reserved" are
> | retained in Python 2.3 alone or in any derivative version prepared by
> | Licensee.
> 
> So what should I understand by: provided, however, that PSF's License
> Agreement ... are retained in Python 2.3 alone or in any derivative 
> version prepared by Licensee.

Yes, the license text and the copyright notice must be attached. It 
doesn't mean that the PSF license is the operative one for the 
derivative work. You can put *your* own terms on top for *your* own code 
as long as you can satisfy the requirements of the PSF license, which 
are very light.

Read Larry Rosen's book:

   http://www.rosenlaw.com/oslbook.htm

-- 
Robert Kern
rkern at ucsd.edu

"In the fields of hell where the grass grows high
  Are the graves of dreams allowed to die."
   -- Richard Harter