Re: an unspecific license
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 10:28:15AM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> > I don't see how someone could rerelease the work under a non-DFSG
> > license if the license it came with explicitly states that any
> > redistribution must use a specific license agreement (the one that
> > came with the original work).
>  I don't think you understand what "public domain" means.
that is a possibility
>  Here, you're talking about a specific clause of a specific license --
> this directly contradicts what you said you were asking about earlier
> (and the concept expressed in the subject line).
Well, of course there would be a license - the enduser would get to pick
which specific license they wanted, a developer (redistributor, anyone
doing something other than using the software themselves) would be
restricted to using the license that came with the code.
>  You didn't say anything about rereleases in your "this is not really
> a license but it's a license anyways" proposal.
> If you put contradictory terms into a license, you can't really predict
> how a court would interpret it.
Hmmm, ok. I gather it would have been better to post specific text for
you to nitpick at, rather than try to present a concept (not knowing the
proper terminology probably doesn't help either, eh).
Thanks for your time.