Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20050905135545.01c90b88@cits1.stanford.edu>
Date:         Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:28:15 -0700
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
From: Brooks Moses <bmoses@STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Licenses based on the LPPL: a request for clarification.
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
Precedence: list
Status: R

To Whom It May Concern:

I have a couple of questions regarding licenses based on the LPPL, and I'm 
hoping that the LaTeX3 Project could provide me with a clarification of the 
terms of the license.

As there appears to be no direct, official address for requesting such 
clarifications, I am sending this to the LaTeX-L mailing list, as that 
appears to be to most appropriate place for such questions.


First, the top of the LPPL (version 1.3) states:

>Everyone is allowed to distribute verbatim copies of this license 
>document, but modification of it is not allowed.

However, lines 312-315 of the same version state:

>You may use the text of this license as a model for your own license, but 
>your license should not refer to the LPPL or otherwise give the impression 
>that your work is distributed under the LPPL.

Am I correct in understanding that the latter partly overrides the former, 
permitting me to create a new license that uses much of the text of the 
LPPL (and thus would appear to be a "modification of it"), so long as these 
restrictions are met?

Second, if I were to create such a license, what would be the appropriate 
way to acknowledge that it is largely based on material on which the LaTeX3 
Project holds copyright, while also meeting the restrictions that it should 
not refer to the LPPL?  Is a line "Portions Copyright 1999 2002-03 LaTeX3 
Project; used with permission" at the top of the new license appropriate 
and sufficient?

Thanks much!
- Brooks