So a big client of mine just completed an security audit of an ios app I created on buzztouch and concluded the following: Json-Framework – This open source framework is created by Stig Brautaset. He requires attribution within the app itself. http://www.superloopy.io/code.html (This should be addressed by the vendor in the future to meet the legal obligation of the license.) Anyone have any ideas what I need to do to address this issue? Thank you! -MJM

Sounds like he just wants a kudos in the header somewhere in the project. Just a simple "JSON open source framework provided in part by Stig Brautaset" in the top notes of one of the main files should suffice. Sounds a little nit-picky by the auditor if you ask me, but at least a simple fix to fully meet their expectations.

Here's the actual license: ---------------------------------------------- Copyright (C) 2007-2014 Stig Brautaset. All rights reserved. /* Copyright (C) 2007-2009 Stig Brautaset. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. * Neither the name of the author nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. */

You guys are awesome. Thanks! -MJM

Ah, my bad. Chris's answer is the one to follow. You'll want to include the full copyright and disclaimer, as the license states. Not just a reference to it as the auditor implied.

At most, you need to include the full license in the documentation for the app, not in the app itself. This could be in the description of the app on the App Store listing, and can be as simple as a link to the license rather than reproducing the entire thing. That's my understanding anyway - I'm no copyright lawyer. Frankly, I'm not entirely sure that including the code in an app and placing it on the app store is the same thing as "redistribution in binary form". That may be talking more about distributing the code as a .a file to include in someone else's app, rather than just having it in the app itself.

So just copy and paste this at the top of the document, correct? Didn't know that it needed attribution, thanks for sharing this mjmccreary. Filed in my notes, for future reference. Was that the only thing the auditor could find?

This actually brings up a bigger question that was discussed a bit at BuzzDay in San Diego, and that's how the whole open source nature of Buzztouch might affect things in your organization. Some businesses have very strict policies about using open source code in any development efforts, so you should check with whomever knows that stuff at your business for the correct policy. And, as illustrated above, if open source was used in the development of the various plugins used in Buzztouch, and there is an open source license associated with it, that attribution needs to be done. Very crazy and complex stuff! Mark

Yes, thanks for jogging my memory about htis topic at Buzztouch. I can't remember the outcome of the discussion, is there a bt opensource guide for developer best practices when using bt as well as plugins created with opensource code. Thanks Ed

Hi Ed, We didn't end up having a general discussion on it, just some side conversations. We don't have any guides developed on this topic (yet...the idea is now in my head!), but the basic guideline should be whatever license the code you use has associated with it. If you go to Github and grab some code, you have to follow their license agreement for attribution. Here's some discussion on open source licenses: http://opensource.org/licenses/category And some Creative Commons attribution discussion: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Mark

No guide that I know of. But general guideline for plugin developers is if you use someone else's code in your plugin, you better include the original license. And general guiding for users of Buzztouch is, pay attention to all licenses you take part in.

Several ways to go about this. Take a look at the National Geographic City Guide app. Dig far enough, you will find their screen giving credit to the open-source software and citing the various licenses. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/city-guides-by-national-geographic/id592453480?mt=8 The iOS apps from IBM have the actual license text included within the app. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ibm-sametime/id472303810?mt=8 Usually the attribution is tucked away in an "about this app" section of the mobile app. Lawyers will usually be conservatively cautious and advise including the text within the app. That helps to take care of the "offline" usage case. We can make it easy for them by including the license text in a PDF file that is included within the app. Or put it within an HTML file in the app. ------ The next question is what did they say about "the source code must be made available to the Users of the software" ? From reading Chris' copy-paste of the SBjson license, he did not specify a distribution stipulation for the source code. -- Niraj

Maybe it would be a good idea to have a standardized format of including a licenses.txt file within each plugin's zip file, which could contain any and all 3rd party license documentation used for that plugin. Since the plugins folder gets downloaded with the project (in bt_plugins), all required licenses would be in the downloaded project for the end users. Make the licenses.txt file part of the required plugin template, like the "screenshots" folder for example.

Great idea, it's great this topic came out, a few of us newbies like myself, that build for big clients, I might have missed this all together as part of my workflow.

This is where the Context Menu can be helpful. Put a More menu item into it. Then the More screen can have the attributions and the license texts easily available. Got to add it to The Big Game app! :-) -- Niraj

If you take somebody else's stuff, you should acgnowledge it. On the Internet, give them a link, in a book, give them a citation. I mean, if somebody wanted to use my plugins and for free, I would at least want the end user to be aware that I was behind the project. That may lead to better support for the end user or they may be wanting to hire me later on. This is, I think, a view we can all agree upon. In real life, there are problems, because we tend to use and disregard at the same time, and we also think that putting links in our software will lead the visitor astray to other sites and apps. So we don't do it, in general. We should, but we don't. On the bright side, attributing properly opens new worlds and horizons. When you are in search of images or sounds for your app, you will find thousands of pieces of material across the Internet, on Flickr and elsewhere and you will be able to use them if you respect their licenses, for free.