Raymond Toy <toy@rtp.ericsson.se> writes:
>
> I take that to mean that using modified BSD code in a GPL product
> doesn't make the modified BSD code now come under a GPL license.
Yes. Only the combination Maxima/Matlisp when distributed together would
be GPL.
> In any case, I looked, and matlisp currently has the original BSD
> license with advertising clause. This can be remedied easily, I
> think.
>
> Ray
>From matlisp/COPYRIGHT:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (c) 2000 The Regents of the University of California.
All rights reserved.
Permission is hereby granted, without written agreement and without
license or royalty fees, to use, copy, modify, and distribute this
software and its documentation for any purpose, provided that the
above copyright notice and the following two paragraphs appear in all
copies of this software.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BE LIABLE TO ANY PARTY
FOR DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE AND ITS DOCUMENTATION, EVEN IF
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGE.
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE SOFTWARE
PROVIDED HEREUNDER IS ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, AND THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA HAS NO OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT, UPDATES,
ENHANCEMENTS, OR MODIFICATIONS.
----------------------------------------------------------------
As much as I know this is already the BSD without advertisement clause.
"BSD with advertisement clause" means that wherever the product is
advertised a reference to the original work has to appear which gets rather
annoying when more and more people contribute. That the copyright in
source code should not change is OK with the GPL.
Nicolas.