On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 08:54:36PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > What Steve said. > > I don't understand how the author of Courier can both: > > 1) have no problem with people linking his software against OpenSSL; > 2) be unwilling to explicitly state a license exception. > > A clear communication of the former logically implies the latter. Hmm, of course I meant: A clear communication of the former logically *precludes* the latter. License terms don't *have* to be in legalese. They just usually are because: * Licensing is a legal issue, and legal terminology, when used well, is both idiomatic and precise; * This provides job security for lawyers. There is a problem with the author telling you "I have no problem with this" and "I'm not going to admit that I have no problem with this" simultaneously, though. -- G. Branden Robinson | The basic test of freedom is Debian GNU/Linux | perhaps less in what we are free to branden@debian.org | do than in what we are free not to http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | do. -- Eric Hoffer
Attachment:
pgpcfWGNjLQVN.pgp
Description: PGP signature