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.
> 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.
email@example.com 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.