On Sep 22, 2004, at 5:02 AM, Rob Alexander wrote:

> Am I right in reading that if I develop a MASON simulation (which
> instantiates MASON classes, and derives new classes from them through
> inheritance) then I can distribute my simulation commercially in
> closed-source form as I (or my employer) sees fit?

Yes.  However, you must acknowledge use of MASON in your product as
specified in the conditions section of the license.

> 2) However, what about the case where I copy-and-paste the code of a
> MASON class in order to create a modified version? Is this any
> different? (Specifically, I'm thinking of taking and
> reworking it to provide extra and different panels).

It is no different.  You're welcome to use the code, as long as you
meet the acknowledgment conditions in the license.  Remember that some
code (not though) is distributed under another license
which you'll have to meet; if so, it's described in the body of that

> "but solely to the extent that any such patent is reasonably necessary
> to enable you to Utilize all or any portion of the source code or
> binary
> form of this software or related data, and not to any greater extent
> that may be necessary to Utilize further modifications or
> combinations."
> Should the final "that" be "than"?

Yes, it should be "than".  Sharp eyes; I'll fix it.  BTW, at the
present time, we have no patents of concern to you.

We're always interested in projects you're working on, open or closed,
free or for pay.  And if your employer insists that modifications of
our code must be closed, remind him that karma does exist in the
software business.  Returning code to the community encourages others
to do so (which he can then borrow from again).