Tweeted twitter.com/StackSoftEng/status/1069652674067480577
3 Updated dead link with new official location (see https://www.freetype.org/license.html)
source | link

In licenses such as that of libjpeg and freetypefreetype, there are clauses like the following:

(2) If only executable code is distributed, then the accompanying documentation must state that "this software is based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group".

or:

o Redistribution in binary form must provide a disclaimer that states that the software is based in part of the work of the FreeType Team, in the distribution documentation.

Is putting a notice in a text file in the installation directory enough? Or is a more obvious notice typically needed? For a non-open-source end application, what's the usual way to display these mandatory acknowledgments?

In licenses such as that of libjpeg and freetype, there are clauses like the following:

(2) If only executable code is distributed, then the accompanying documentation must state that "this software is based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group".

or:

o Redistribution in binary form must provide a disclaimer that states that the software is based in part of the work of the FreeType Team, in the distribution documentation.

Is putting a notice in a text file in the installation directory enough? Or is a more obvious notice typically needed? For a non-open-source end application, what's the usual way to display these mandatory acknowledgments?

In licenses such as that of libjpeg and freetype, there are clauses like the following:

(2) If only executable code is distributed, then the accompanying documentation must state that "this software is based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group".

or:

o Redistribution in binary form must provide a disclaimer that states that the software is based in part of the work of the FreeType Team, in the distribution documentation.

Is putting a notice in a text file in the installation directory enough? Or is a more obvious notice typically needed? For a non-open-source end application, what's the usual way to display these mandatory acknowledgments?

2 edited title
| link

For copyleftopen-source licenses with an acknowledgement clause, how obvious does the notice need to be?

1
source | link

For copyleft licenses with an acknowledgement clause, how obvious does the notice need to be?

In licenses such as that of libjpeg and freetype, there are clauses like the following:

(2) If only executable code is distributed, then the accompanying documentation must state that "this software is based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group".

or:

o Redistribution in binary form must provide a disclaimer that states that the software is based in part of the work of the FreeType Team, in the distribution documentation.

Is putting a notice in a text file in the installation directory enough? Or is a more obvious notice typically needed? For a non-open-source end application, what's the usual way to display these mandatory acknowledgments?