[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: YAL (Yet another license)

Jonathan P Tomer writes:
> hm, does the gpl require the distributor of a derived work to give
> licence to all applicable patents they own?


> i think that's a nice feature.

I agree.

> the legal file requirement is potentially problematic (since it forces a
> particular name)

I Think it is ok (dumb, but ok).  It just requires a particular name for
one file, not the package.

> this licence looks an awful lot like another one we looked at a while
> ago, which one was it and what did we decide about that one?

I don't know.  Many of these heavily lawyered licenses have a superficial
John Hasler                This posting is in the public domain.
john@dhh.gt.org		   Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill         Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin         Do not send email advertisements to this address.

Reply to: