Byron Jeff wrote: > The likely requirements for a license that you want are as follows: > > 1) Anyone can use the library in their product without having to > release their source. > > 2) Anyone that improves the library is required to release the > improvements under the same license as the original library. This second requirement may be counterproductive, depending on the OP's aims. If he is trying to push the social agenda of free software, then it makes sense. If he wants the world to get the maximum benefit from his work and is seeking at most recognition for it, then this is too restrictive. Here is what I use for most of my publicly distributed PIC code: ; *************************************************************** ; * Copyright (C) 2008, Embed Inc (http://www.embedinc.com) * ; * * ; * Permission to copy this file is granted as long as this * ; * copyright notice is included in its entirety at the * ; * beginning of the file, whether the file is copied in whole * ; * or in part and regardless of whether other information is * ; * added to the copy. * ; * * ; * The contents of this file may be used in any way, * ; * commercial or otherwise. This file is provided "as is", * ; * and Embed Inc makes no claims of suitability for a * ; * particular purpose nor assumes any liability resulting from * ; * its use. * ; *************************************************************** It's plain, simple, and asks so little in return for using the code that very few people or organizations will find the cost too high. This maximizes dissemination of the code and thereby its overall usefulness. There is also little incentive to cheat. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist