Problem
LICENSE (ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INCORPORATED COMPONENTS) correctly names the incorporated open-source components and their licenses: liblsl (MIT, Christian A. Kothe), libsodium (ISC), pugixml (MIT), Boost (BSL), Loguru (public domain), Catch2 (BSL). README line 206 does the same.
Naming a license is not the same as reproducing its notice. MIT, ISC, and the Boost Software License each require that the copyright and permission notice accompany redistributed copies:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
Currently:
liblsl/ is vendored in this repository with no LICENSE file of its own- there is no
THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES file carrying the verbatim texts
LICENSE line 27 defines "Software" as covering "all source code ... and any related materials contained in this repository", with no carve-out stating that third-party components remain under their original terms
The combination means a reader cloning the repository sees third-party MIT/ISC code inside a scope that reads as wholly proprietary, without the notices those licenses require.
Proposed fix
Why now
The manuscript makes explicit claims about what this license permits, and reviewers have already read this LICENSE closely during peer review. Resolving it before submission removes an avoidable line of objection, and it is a documentation change rather than a change to the licensing model itself.
Not legal advice; worth confirming the final wording with UCSD OIC.
Problem
LICENSE(ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INCORPORATED COMPONENTS) correctly names the incorporated open-source components and their licenses: liblsl (MIT, Christian A. Kothe), libsodium (ISC), pugixml (MIT), Boost (BSL), Loguru (public domain), Catch2 (BSL). README line 206 does the same.Naming a license is not the same as reproducing its notice. MIT, ISC, and the Boost Software License each require that the copyright and permission notice accompany redistributed copies:
Currently:
liblsl/is vendored in this repository with noLICENSEfile of its ownTHIRD-PARTY-NOTICESfile carrying the verbatim textsLICENSEline 27 defines "Software" as covering "all source code ... and any related materials contained in this repository", with no carve-out stating that third-party components remain under their original termsThe combination means a reader cloning the repository sees third-party MIT/ISC code inside a scope that reads as wholly proprietary, without the notices those licenses require.
Proposed fix
THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES.mdwith the verbatim license text for each incorporated componentliblsl/LICENSE(upstream MIT, preserving the original copyright line)LICENSEstating that incorporated third-party components remain subject to their original licenses, and that the proprietary grant applies to the Secure LSL additions and the integrated workWhy now
The manuscript makes explicit claims about what this license permits, and reviewers have already read this LICENSE closely during peer review. Resolving it before submission removes an avoidable line of objection, and it is a documentation change rather than a change to the licensing model itself.
Not legal advice; worth confirming the final wording with UCSD OIC.