On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Bram Neijt <bneijt@gmail.com> wrote:
That should be ok then. The RFC states:
"""The MD5 algorithm is being placed in the public domain for review and possible adoption as a standard.""""
So there should be no problem then. I had problems with the code I used was to much of a "derived work", which ment:
"""License is also granted to make and use derivative works provided that such works are identified as "derived from the RSA Data Security, Inc. MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm" in all material mentioning or referencing the derived work."""
I'm no lawyer but I think you are in the clear then :D
Bram
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 04:42 -0400, Daryle Walker wrote:
I didn't take the implementation from any of the MD5 sources lying around, I did a "clean room" build from the RFC's description. (They're all byte-wise, while mine is bit-wise [the only one, AFAIK].) I did use the RFC's sample code to get the values of the various constants. Do I need to have some sort of licensing with the RFC board; aren't they free for all?
I think you made a mistake by using the sample code. I don't think the Boost license can accept the "derived from the RSA Data Security, Inc. MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm" requirement. I.e. the algorithm is completely free, but the sample code is not. No lawyer either... /$