I want to use SVG Edit for a project. This software is distributed under the Apache 2 license.

I've seen that:


all copies, modified or unmodified,
are accompanied by a copy of the
licence
all modifications are clearly marked
as being the work of the modifier
all notices of copyright, trademark
and patent rights are reproduced
accurately in distributed copies
the licensee does not use any
trademarks that belong to the
licensor


Do these pertain to the code or should I display the license somewhere in the GUI? The original software displays a "powered by SVG Edit", is it ok if I remove this? And most importantly: what is the correct etiquette for doing this? I don't want to be a jerk, but at the same time I want to simplify the UI as much as possible and removing the link will be part of it if it's not considered rude.

You do not need to display the license in the GUI, under any circumstances.

For software licensed under the Apache License Version 2.0 (APLv2), it is quite okay to modify the software in the way that you suggest. That license encourages modification. The license assures your freedom to remove "powered by SVG Edit" in your modified version.

However, see the APLv2 (section 4(b)) about your obligations regarding the NOTICES file that ships with the APLv2 software. You are required to display its contents in a way that is appropriate to the software. (Mind you, SVG Edit probably already does this.) You may not remove the "powered by SVG Edit" if it so happens that that comes from the NOTICES file. But, if you distribute the NOTICES file and the source code, then you are exempted from this. See section 4(b) of the APLv2 to better understand your options.

In any case, what you want to do is not rude, especially if it makes your derivative work better.
