Re: Unsettle law
> *) BSD+MIT in, who gets attribution?
Every single copyright holder gets attribution, with the license they granted you.
> *) Many licences in, output code cannot safely be distributed under any license.
You have to include all of them. Every copyright holder gets named. Along with every license.
Not complicated at all. Just very tedious, and very necessary.
The most recent project I shipped used a lot of open-source packages (none of them GPL, which I consider to be a plague upon humankind*). All told, after scanning sources, and dependent libraries, the copyright notices for my medium-sized project are 148,241 bytes long -- considerably larger when it's translated to HTML in the about box. I would estimate that about 4,000 people or groups of people have copyrights in some part of the code in my project. Yes, I did merge license text. (multiple copyrights, with only one statement of the license). There are in fact substantial variations and families of variations to "BSD" licenses (e.g. BSD 3-clause, BSD 0-clause), and many variants of the "MIT" licenses as well.
* Why is the GPL a plague upon humankind? Because it divides opensource software into the half that people genuinely made available for use by anyone, and the half that is virally tainted by the GPL which can't be used by anyone that doesn't want to become infected by a license that all the corporate lawyers I've talked to seem to consider to be uninterpretable gibberish. (Try parsing the expanding definition of what "linking" means in GPL 3, for an obvious example).