I’m wondering what is the recommended way to attribute our usage of OpenTAP?
For example, a lot of software will include their OSS attributions in an “About” page that is easily accessed from the UI.
I’m wondering what is the recommended way to attribute our usage of OpenTAP?
For example, a lot of software will include their OSS attributions in an “About” page that is easily accessed from the UI.
@david-wsd good question, and likely something we should document in more detail. But since OpenTAP is under the Mozilla Public License v2, it is pretty simple as long as it is unmodified versions of OpenTAP and just involves a notice informing the user of where to find the source code:
As long as the people who distributed the program to you have complied with the MPL, typically nothing. To check and see if the people who distributed the program to you have complied with the MPL, look for the notice that tells you where the software is available in Source Code form (i.e., check that it complies with Section 3.2(a)), and then check that the Source Code is available in that place, including a notice that informs you that the Source Code is available under the terms of the MPL (i.e., check that it complies with Section 3.1).
If you are only distributing libraries, or are only distributing some parts of the program as you received it, it could be that you need to take extra steps to make sure that users of your program are appropriately informed of their rights, as required by section 3.2(a).
In the case of Mozilla Firefox, the Mozilla-provided executable programs already meet the requirements of Section 3, including the notices required by Section 3.1 and 3.2.
If you want to add your own terms when you distribute the software, Section 3.2(b) requires that those terms must not restrict a recipient’s rights under the MPL, and if you offer a warranty on the software, Section 3.5 requires you to make clear that it is offered by you alone.
Q7: I want to distribute (outside my organization) complete and unchanged executable programs built from MPL-licensed software by someone other than me. What do I have to do?
As long as the people who distributed the program to you have complied with the MPL, typically nothing. To check and see if the people who distributed the program to you have complied with the MPL, look for the notice that tells you where the software is available in Source Code form (i.e., check that it complies with Section 3.2(a)), and then check that the Source Code is available in that place, including a notice that informs you that the Source Code is available under the terms of the MPL (i.e., check that it complies with Section 3.1).
If you are only distributing libraries, or are only distributing some parts of the program as you received it, it could be that you need to take extra steps to make sure that users of your program are appropriately informed of their rights, as required by section 3.2(a).
In the case of Mozilla Firefox, the Mozilla-provided executable programs already meet the requirements of Section 3, including the notices required by Section 3.1 and 3.2.
If you want to add your own terms when you distribute the software, Section 3.2(b) requires that those terms must not restrict a recipient’s rights under the MPL, and if you offer a warranty on the software, Section 3.5 requires you to make clear that it is offered by you alone.
@bweinberg is an expert in this space, so he can help with any other specific questions.
Thanks @brennen_direnzo.
But since OpenTAP is under the Mozilla Public License v2, it is pretty simple as long as it is unmodified versions of OpenTAP and just involves a notice informing the user of where to find the source code
How about in the case of paid versions of Keysight Test Automation, would the same notice be required?
In that case, you really wouldn’t be the distributor. It would still be hosted by Keysight. You would be distributing your plugin and a special notice is not required.