[LLVMdev] Licensing requirements

[David Given]

Tor Gunnar Houeland wrote:
[...]
> Thanks, that looks quite short and clear, though it doesn't seem to be 
> obvious (and I would not personally wish to rely on it).

Some random searching on t'interweb shows that people in general appear
to be undecided as to whether the MIT license requires attribution in
binaries.

Given that the process of compiling source code to binary can be
considered to be a mathematical transform, I think it's perfectly
reasonable to argue that the source and the binary are equivalent and
therefore the phrase 'all copies or substantial portions of the
software' applies to both.

Certainly, for my day job I write commercial software with MIT code
embedded in it, and our legal department have told us we must provide a
copy of the MIT license with our binaries.

-- 
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ─────
│ "I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my
│ telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out
│ how to use my telephone." --- Bjarne Stroustrup

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110707/51ab3c06/attachment.sig>