Re: PHP-Nuke License Conclusion?
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 12:51:51PM -0400, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Can you quote caselaw that demonstrates this to be the case? As far as
> I can remember, I've never heard of such a license with additional
> riders being litigated. [But then again, I'm not a lawyer, nor am I an
> expert in licenses.]
> I hope we can agree that the fact that such a license contains an
> internal contradiction is open to interpretation, and litigation (most
> likely) would have to ensue with an as of yet undetermined outcome.
> The acceptance of licenses into Debian with dubious legality and/or
> grants of permision is not something that we should coutenance
> lightly. [I know that if such a license were to cross my desk for a
> project that I was doing any serious work on, I would require
> clarification from legal counsel and most likely they would want to
> see some sort of clarification from the author as well.]
IANAL either... at the moment I'm just trying to point out that the kind
of construction we are talking about need not be inherently broken. In
the simplest case, I agree that you could argue about the interpretation
(clearly, we are doing so). I would assert, though, that it is possible
to phrase one's construction such that it is not reasonable to argue about
it. It would then follow that the question becomes "where do we draw the
Nick Phillips -- email@example.com
Excellent day to have a rotten day.