At 09:58 PM 01-05-01 +0000, you wrote:

> > Also, I would not advertise Firebird as the "Interbase descendant"
> > because that's a violation of Borland's trademark and the Interbase
> > Public License.
>
>Violation of the promotion clause (Amendments II.2) you mean? In my
>opinion it must be permitted to explain the relationship between
>InterBase and Firebird and therefore obviously to use the name
>InterBase for that purpose. Especially on the Firebird website I
>therefore don't see a problem with this.

You don't know Borland Legal! I think we need to settle on some phrase that indicates the origins of the sourcecode without saying "descended from". One that was suggested (possibly in Firebird-devel, I don't remember exactly) was "developed from the open source code released under the Interbase Public License". It was pointed out that this satisfies two requirements: one to indicate the origins without being accused of using Interbase's wonderful reputation to promote; the other to meet the requirement to state the licence.

It also reflects the unchanging true case and avoids confusion and complications if/when Borland decides to release a version of later source code under some other licence. The IPL as at 25 July 2000 stands for all time as far as Firebird is concerned. It might not be a too-silly idea to include the date of the licence in the statement, considering that Borland has already changed the IPL twice since the original release date.

Helen

All for Open and Open for All
InterBase Developer Initiative · http://www.interbase2000.org
_______________________________________________________