silc license change before v1.0 ?

[Anders N. B. <de...@de...>]

The silc project has so far been developed under the GPL license. I suggest we start
looking at changing it before release of version 1.0. Why is explained in the answers to
the questions below.

This has previously been discussed more than once, so I'll begin this thread by answering
commonly asked questions, so we can avoid them.

Q: What's wrong with the GPL?
A: This is a legitimate question, but the answer is obvious. When the toolkit is licensed
under the GPL, it may not be used to create anything but GPL licensed software. This will
seriously prevent adaption from other projects. A dedicated silc client *must* currently
be licensed under the GPL. Do we want it to be impossible to create commercial or
closed-source silc clients, or for that matter, a less restrictive client licensed under
for instance the MIT license? Because that is our current situation.

Q: Ok, can't we just use LGPL?
A: Most people asking this question hasn't actually read GPL or LGPL, and assume the LGPL
is just GPL without the clause about dependency. This is wrong. It's got it's own
additional quirks. Some of them won't even hold up in court in most civilized countries.
:-)
Q: So you're saying GPL/LGPL is bad? Isn't that just unconstructive?
A: No, it's not bad, it's just that most people doesn't understand it, and blindly use it
as many places as they can because they think it makes the world better.

Q: But many many thousands of programmers are using the GPL/LGPL, shouldn't we?
A: There are reasons to use GPL/LGPL on some projects. These projects are usually
standalone applications intended to be replacements for commercial products, such as gimp
and gcc. We are making a reference implementation of the silc protocol, this project in
its current state is not intended for commercial distribution. If pekka later wants to
make a commercial program from this, there's nothing stopping him, but that will not be a
reference implementation. This is.

Q: So what license should we use?
A: Personally, I think the BSD license is a good choice. It's not nazi restrctive and it's
simple enough for people to be able to read it, and more importantly, understand it.

Q: Why not X license instead?
A: There are many other licenses which are suitable for the project.. as suggested in a
previous thread, the MIT license will not get any objections from me, but I think we
should use a license as common as possible, without putting a bundle of restrictions on
people.

Q: So should we change the license for all 3 modules?
A: No, the client should probably remain GPL, due to us using the irssi source and it not
really being our project.

Q: Why are you constantly reffering to "we" when it's pekka's project.
A: Isn't the spirit of GPL to be a community about the project? ;) Seriously though, I see
silc as a community effort, even though pekka does most of the actual coding.

Below is the BSD license. Other possible licenses are available at
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ for your review.

- Anders Nor Berle

---- BEGIN BSD LICENSE ----
 Copyright (c) [year] [your name]
 All rights reserved.

 Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
 modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
 are met:
 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
    documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

 THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
 ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
 IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
 ARE DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
 FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
 DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
 OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
 HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
 LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
 OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
 SUCH DAMAGE.
---- END BSD LICENSE ----