Re: Is the OPL DFSG-ok?
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 12:10:54PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> OpenContent License (OPL)
> Version 1.0, July 14, 1998.
Hm. This is just a guess, but my guess is that this hasn't been run
through a lawyer. The language is fairly imprecise in places, and there
are grammatical errors. The license treats the word "OpenContent" as having
implicit meaning. The quality of language in the license doesn't lend itself
to erasing ambiguities.
Personally, I wouldn't use it until it has been greatly cleaned up.
Just my opinion...
--
Mason Loring Bliss (( "In the drowsy dark cave of the mind dreams
mason@acheron.middleboro.ma.us )) build their nest with fragments dropped
http://acheron.ne.mediaone.net (( from day's caravan." - Rabindranath Tagore
Reply to: