diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'release/src/router/busybox/docs/busybox.net/license.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | release/src/router/busybox/docs/busybox.net/license.html | 99 |
1 files changed, 99 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/release/src/router/busybox/docs/busybox.net/license.html b/release/src/router/busybox/docs/busybox.net/license.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..2a4c51d1 --- /dev/null +++ b/release/src/router/busybox/docs/busybox.net/license.html @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ +<!--#include file="header.html" --> + +<p> +<h3><a name="license">BusyBox is licensed under the GNU General Public License, version 2</a></h3> + +<p>BusyBox is licensed under <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html#SEC1">the +GNU General Public License</a> version 2, which is often abbreviated as GPLv2. +(This is the same license the Linux kernel is under, so you may be somewhat +familiar with it by now.)</p> + +<p>A complete copy of the license text is included in the file LICENSE in +the BusyBox source code.</p> + +<p><a href="products.html">Anyone thinking of shipping BusyBox as part of a +product</a> should be familiar with the licensing terms under which they are +allowed to use and distribute BusyBox. Read the full test of the GPL (either +through the above link, or in the file LICENSE in the busybox tarball), and +also read the <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html">Frequently +Asked Questions about the GPL</a>.</p> + +<p>Basically, if you distribute GPL software the license requires that you also +distribute the source code to that GPL-licensed software. So if you distribute +BusyBox without making the source code to the version you distribute available, +you violate the license terms, and thus infringe on the copyrights of BusyBox. +(This requirement applies whether or not you modified BusyBox; either way the +license terms still apply to you.) Read the license text for the details.</p> + +<h3><a name="version">A note on GPL versions</a></h3> + +<p>Version 2 of the GPL is the only version of the GPL which current versions +of BusyBox may be distributed under. New code added to the tree is licensed +GPL version 2, and the project's license is GPL version 2.</p> + +<p>Older versions of BusyBox (versions 1.2.2 and earlier, up through about svn +16112) included variants of the recommended +"GPL version 2 or (at your option) later versions" boilerplate +permission grant. Ancient versions of BusyBox +(before svn 49) did not specify any version at all, and section 9 of GPLv2 +(the most recent version at that time) says those old versions may be +redistributed under any version of GPL (including the obsolete V1). This was +conceptually similar to a dual license, except that the different licenses were +different versions of the GPL.</p> + +<p>However, BusyBox has apparently always contained chunks of code that were +licensed under GPL version 2 only. Examples include applets written by Linus +Torvalds (util-linux/mkfs_minix.c and util_linux/mkswap.c) which stated they +"may be redistributed as per the Linux copyright" (which Linus +clarified in the +2.4.0-pre8 release announcement in 2000 was GPLv2 only), and Linux kernel code +copied into libbb/loop.c (after Linus's announcement). There are probably +more, because all we used to check was that the code was GPL, not which +version. (Before the GPLv3 draft proceedings in 2006, it was a purely +theoretical issue that didn't come up much.)</p> + +<p>To summarize: every version of BusyBox may be distributed under the terms of +GPL version 2. New versions (after 1.2.2) may <b>only</b> be distributed under +GPLv2, not under other versions of the GPL. Older versions of BusyBox might +(or might not) be distributable under other versions of the GPL. If you +want to use a GPL version other than 2, you should start with one of the old +versions such as release 1.2.2 or SVN 16112, and do your own homework to +identify and remove any code that can't be licensed under the GPL version you +want to use. New development is all GPLv2.</p> + +<h3><a name="enforce">License enforcement</a></h3> + +<p>BusyBox's copyrights are enforced by the <a +href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/">Software Freedom Law Center</a> +(you can contact them at gpl@busybox.net), which +"accepts primary responsibility for enforcement of US copyrights on the +software... and coordinates international copyright enforcement efforts for +such works as necessary." If you distribute BusyBox in a way that doesn't +comply with the terms of the license BusyBox is distributed under, expect to +hear from these guys. Their entire reason for existing is to do pro-bono +legal work for free/open source software projects. (We used to list people who +violate the BusyBox license in <a href="shame.html">The Hall of Shame</a>, +but these days we find it much more effective to hand them over to the +lawyers.)</p> + +<p>Our enforcement efforts are aimed at bringing people into compliance with +the BusyBox license. Open source software is under a different license from +proprietary software, but if you violate that license you're still a software +pirate and the law gives the vendor (us) some big sticks to play with. We +don't want monetary awards, injunctions, or to generate bad PR for a company, +unless that's the only way to get somebody that repeatedly ignores us to comply +with the license on our code.</p> + +<h3><a name="good">A Good Example</a></h3> + +<p>These days, <a href="http://www.linksys.com/">Linksys</a> is +doing a good job at complying with the GPL, they get to be an +example of how to do things right. Please take a moment and +check out what they do with +<a href="http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Content_C1&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1115416836002&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper"> +distributing the firmware for their WRT54G Router.</a> +Following their example would be a fine way to ensure that you +have also fulfilled your licensing obligations.</p> + +<!--#include file="footer.html" --> + |