CATS Public License

[RussH]

sure - what do you want to know? I think the wiki is quite clear in terms of licensing etc?

[zartoop]

cognizio are never going to come to the party willingly - they would not want the competition

questions for a sharp legal mind
- is the original license valid - I doubt that it is?
- was Exhibit B ever allowed to be included under the Mozilla License - perhaps not?

[RussH]

When the doors slammed shut on the 'community release' January of this year, I had a quick conversation with the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) and they basically confirmed that the license is valid (after all if you write the software you can choose to release it under whatever license you want) - and that

(the) license grants you indefinite permission under copyright law to redistribute the work under the terms of that license. However, they may have trademark, patent or other claims against such distribution.

Therefore all the terms within that license and the Exhibits are valid - and I've been keen to stress this throughout
(http://www.opencats.org/wiki/index.php? ... icense_FAQ)

Basically - as I've said a few times here - if you wish to extend the existing codebase, you do it under the CPL.
If you don't like the CPL, the only (legal) alternative is to write a new app from the ground-up that does not share code with CATS.

That said - my 2p's worth;
(and apologies to redbullmarky for stealing some of his ideas)

- the majority of the effort over the years on CATS was refining the process flow. That work is done now.
- if the app was written today, it'd probably use a modern php framework rather than custom-coding it all.
- some of the major coding efforts of CATS are not open to us - the 'community' users - such as the hosted resume parsing. That effort wouldn't therefore need to be expended.