diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE | 8 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | docs/busybox.net/license.html | 47 |
2 files changed, 51 insertions, 4 deletions
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +--- A note on GPL versions + +BusyBox is distributed under version 2 of the General Public License (included +in its entirety, below). Version 2 is the only version of this license which +this version of BusyBox (or modified versions derived from this one) may be +distributed under. + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991 diff --git a/docs/busybox.net/license.html b/docs/busybox.net/license.html index 8f7828502..96f7b3a0f 100644 --- a/docs/busybox.net/license.html +++ b/docs/busybox.net/license.html @@ -1,12 +1,15 @@ <!--#include file="header.html" --> <p> -<h3>BusyBox is licensed under the GNU General Public License</h3> +<h3>BusyBox is licensed under the GNU General Public License, version 2</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 generally -abbreviated as the GPL. (This is the same license the Linux kernel is under, -so you may be somewhat familiar with it by now.)</p> +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 @@ -22,6 +25,42 @@ 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 note on GPL versions</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 the 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>License enforcement</h3> + <p>BusyBox's copyrights are enforced by the <a href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org">Software Freedom Law Center</a>, which "accepts primary responsibility for enforcement of US copyrights on the |