On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 01:42:02PM +1000, Drake Diedrich wrote:
> <Overfiend> CR: BTW, your proposal was very lousily timed, IMO.
> <CosmicRay> Overfiend: oh?
> <Overfiend> CR: it probably completely derails any chances of the planned 6
> +amendments to the DFSG that I told you about. :(
> <CosmicRay> those are probably more important
>
> CosmicRay == John Goerzen, the proponent of the General Resolution
> Overfiend == Branden Robinson, one of the 5 sponsors
>
> To Goerzen and Robinson - who is next?
Tsk, tsk. I realise bemoaning FUD arguments is out of date these days, but
surely not so far out of date that spreading them is okay.
In the past, IIRC, Branden's advocated tightening the DFSG to exclude
licenses with the BSD advertising clause [0], especially now that the
original BSD advertising clause has been removed. This makes a lot of
sense: the BSD advertising clause sucked.
We've also developed a few more guidelines on what licenses are acceptable
that haven't been noted down anywhere official yet (termination cluases,
and notification clauses, eg).
Cheers,
aj
[0] Any advertisements mentioning the product must also include the
`Copyright the Regents of the University of California, Berkeley',
or so. So if you say "We have BSD with networking support!" you have
to add "BSD copyright..." somewhere else on your ad. Painful, annoying,
expensive and essentially pointless.
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
-- Dave Clark
Attachment:
pgpgsfwtLJb6E.pgp
Description: PGP signature