Filter
Top Products
Appendix E Open Source Licences
Media Server User’s Guide
500
How should Boost programmers apply the license to source and header files? Add a comment based
on the following template, substituting appropriate text for the italicized portion:
// Copyright Joe Coder 2004 - 2006.
// Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
// (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at
// http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
Please leave an empty line before and after the above comment block. It is fine if the copyright and
license messages are not on different lines; in no case there should be other intervening text. Do
not include "All rights reserved" anywhere.
Other ways of licensing source files have been considered, but some of them turned out to
unintentionally nullify legal elements of the license. Having fixed language for referring to the
license helps corporate legal departments evaluate the boost distribution. Creativity in license
reference language is strongly discouraged, but judicious changes in the use of whitespace are fine.
How should the license be applied to documentation files, instead? Very similarly to the way it is
applied to source files: the user should see the very same text indicated in the template above,
with the only difference that both the local and the web copy of LICENSE_1_0.txt should be linked
to. Refer to the HTML source code of this page in case of doubt.
Note that the location of the local LICENSE_1_0.txt needs to be indicated relatively to the position
of your documentation file (../LICENSE_1_0.txt, ../../LICENSE_1_0.txt etc.)
How is the Boost license different from the GNU General Public License (GPL)? The Boost license
permits the creation of derivative works for commercial or non-commercial use with no legal
requirement to release your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring reproduction
of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and the fact that the Boost license is not
"viral": if you distribute your own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license applies only
to the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you are free to license your own code under any
terms you like. The GPL is also much longer, and thus may be harder to understand.
Why the phrase "machine-executable object code generated by a source language processor"? To
distinguish cases where we do not require reproduction of the copyrights and license, such as
object libraries, shared libraries, and final program executables, from cases where reproduction is
still required, such as distribution of self-extracting archives of source code or precompiled header
files. More detailed wording was rejected as not being legally necessary, and reducing readability.
Why is the "disclaimer" paragraph of the license entirely in uppercase? Capitalization of these
particular provisions is a US legal mandate for consumer protection. (Diane Cabell)
Does the copyright and license cover interfaces too? The conceptual interface to a library isn't
covered. The particular representation expressed in the header is covered, as is the documentation,
examples, test programs, and all the other material that goes with the library. A different
implementation is free to use the same logical interface, however. Interface issues have been
fought out in court several times; ask a lawyer for details.
Why doesn't the license prohibit the copyright holder from patenting the covered software? No one
who distributes their code under the terms of this license could turn around and sue a user for
patent infringement. (Devin Smith)