[vtkusers] BSD license question

[Berk Geveci]

That sounds right to me.

-berk


On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Oliver Kania
<ptw.freiburg at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the answer,
> you replied :
>
> I'd say yes, you have to include the VTK copyright/statement in your
> documentation. "Redistributions in binary form" would include
> statically linking to VTK libraries as you are distributing VTK object
> files as part of your binary.
>
> So just to be 100% sure : the BSD license only applies to the VTK libs which
> are no longer visible because they are statically linked in and we can write
> something like:
>
> Our application links with VTK which uses the following license:
>
> ... license text ....
>
> 2009/3/18 Berk Geveci <berk.geveci at kitware.com>
>>
>> > 1. If we release an application that links with the VTK Dlls
>> > statically , is it necessary to  attach the license at all ? I am asking
>> > this because the clauses
>> > only refer to REDISTRIBUTION. However, we only use a statically
>> > linked VTK and do not redistribute the dlls.
>> > This came to my mind because the license seems to make a difference
>> > between
>> > redistribution and usage:
>> >
>> > Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, .....
>> >
>> > the following list of license requirements however only refers to
>> > REDISTRIBUTION and not to USE.
>>
>> I'd say yes, you have to include the VTK copyright/statement in your
>> documentation. "Redistributions in binary form" would include
>> statically linking to VTK libraries as you are distributing VTK object
>> files as part of your binary.
>>
>> > 2. Another question: the BSD-license will have no effect concerning the
>> > distribution of our application.
>> > E.g. others wont be able to use our binaries for free -- correct ?
>>
>> It is your choice. You can distribute you application free or sell it.
>> VTK license does not impose any conditions other than the inclusion of
>> the copyright/license statement in your documentation.
>>
>> -berk
>
>