Boost License/Common Public License

• Must be simple to read and understand.

FAIL: Looks like it was written by a team of lawyers, with the intended audience being laywers.

• Must grant permission to copy, use and modify the software for any use (commercial and non-commercial) for no fee.

PASS: [Clause 2a, 2b]

• Must require that the license appear on all copies of the software source code.

PASS: [Clause 3]

• Must not require that the license appear with executables or other binary uses of the library.

PASS: Caveat: If a license appears in "the Program", it may not be removed. [Clause 3]

• Must not require that the source code be available for execution or other binary uses of the library.

FAIL: Requires that the license state the location of the source and how to obtain it.

• May restrict the use of the name and description of the library to the standard version found on the Boost web site.

No such restrictions.

• Summary

FAIL: While this license is not what I would call "simple to read and understand", it does look like it has been thoroughly written by possibly qualified lawyers. It also looks like it could be made to be conforming without much difficulty. The main point of interest is in the liability verbiage, which looks much more mature than most licenses. Whether it is enforceable, or offers more or less protection than other licenses should probably be ascertained by a qualified legal professional.

-- David B. Held