Re: an unspecific license
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
> > What are the ramifications of releasing software with a statement of
> > what type of license the software can be used under, instead of explicit
> > terms and conditions?
> The big question would be: did the author really mean what was said?
I don't see how that would be relevant; if the words do not convey the
author's intent then the author should have been more careful with what
words were used. I mean, you have to work with what you have, anything
else is fantasy, right.
> > e.g., If a package is release with the following license statement
> > (or whatever conveys the same intent, which I hope is clear):
> > This software can be used by individuals and corporations under
> > the terms and conditions of any license that conforms to the
> > Debian Free Software Guidelines.
> Any license? For example, public domain software meets DFSG.
That is correct.
> > can one then go on to say...
> > Redistribution of this software, or any work derived from it,
> > must contain this license statement.
> I think this statement would be ambiguous.
In what way?
(keep in mind that both statements should be read as `the gist of it')
If anything, I expected the last statement to be seen as potentially
conflicting with a DFSG compliant license.