Re: ARM memcpy

["J. Johnston" <jjohnstn at redhat dot com>]

I am not a legal expert, but that is how I read it.  Any version of BSD code that
is owned by the University of California, Berkeley.  It is not directly specified that you
can renumber any following paragraphs after deleting the one in question, but I assume it
is ok and that is what I have done where applicable (i.e. clause 4 then becomes 3, etc..).

-- Jeff J.

Joel Sherrill wrote:
> 
> "J. Johnston" wrote:
> >
> 
> > >
> > > Joel, there is a problem.  There is an advertising clause in the license that is
> > > not permitted.  You will have to either find out if the file has been updated or if
> > > there is permission to remove the clause, otherwise you will have to find another
> > > source for the file.
> > >
> >
> > Sorry Joel,
> >
> > I forgot about the notice: ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change
> > until just after I sent this.  There is already permission to remove the clause from the
> > files.
> 
> Just to clarify in my mind, does this mean that any advertising clause
> in code in the
> NetBSD, FreeBSD, or OpenBSD tree can be removed if it looks like this:
> 
> + * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
> software
> + *    must display the following acknowledgement:
> + *     This product includes software developed by the NetBSD
> + *     Foundation, Inc. and its contributors.
> 
> The ftp link you cite allows for removal of this clause:
> 
> "     * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
> software
>       *    must display the following acknowledgement:
>       *    This product includes software developed by the University of
>       *    California, Berkeley and its contributors."
> 
> Does that cover the NetBSD Foundation as well?  Have they made a
> separate
> statement?
> 
> --joel