Is the FreeRTOS License exception text itself licensed / copyrighted?

michaelfbecker wrote on Tuesday, September 20, 2016:

Hi All,

This may seem like a bit of a pedantic question, but are we free to use a slightly modified version of the FreeRTOS License Exception text for add on features sitting on top of the FreeRTOS Kernel?

Specifically, I’ve put together a C++ wrapper library that I’ve been actively working on that sits on top of the FreeRTOS public interface. I’ve currently released it as GPLv2 because that seemed safest and is compatible. However I know this is restrictive to folks that might want to use it in commerical products so I’d like to add similar exception text that is used with FreeRTOS (changing the name to the library name and the copyright holder to myself). However, I also know that License agreements themselves can be copyrighted / licensed, so before using the exception text and changing it a bit, I’d like to know that this is ok.

Best regards,

rtel wrote on Tuesday, September 20, 2016:

Hi Mike - well I’m not a lawyer so what I say is opinion only and not
legal advice (usual caveat) but as far as I know there is no reason why
you cannot use the same text, replacing the library name and copyright
owner - after all - that is what we did to get the text in the first place.

michaelfbecker wrote on Wednesday, September 21, 2016:

That works for me. Thanks for the quick reply!