[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Some licensing questions regarding celestia

Quoting Anthony DeRobertis (asd@suespammers.org):

> Why not do something like:
> 	<statement (maybe) releasing work to public domain>
> 	If the above is not legally possible, then (name[s]) grant(s) you
> 	and any other party receiving this code a perpetual, irrevocable,
> 	royalty-free license to [everything copyright law prohibits].
> 	(name[s]) additionally grant(s) you a royalty-free... license
> 	to do anything else that you would be allowed to do with a
> 	work in the public domain.
> 	It is the intent of (name[s]) that this work be treated as if
> 	the "public domain" statement above is valid.
> What would be wrong with that? Best case, it is public domain; worst 
> case, it is public domain in all but name.

I like it; it would probably work (my guess).  The only thing wrong with
it is there's no exclusion of warranties and damages, a la BSD or MIT/X
I still can't for the life of me understand why anyone would _not_ want
those on a work one is handing out for free, but to each his own.

Cheers,             "I used to be on the border of insanity.  However, due 
Rick Moen           to pressing political concerns, I recently had to invade."
rick@linuxmafia.com                        -- Kurt Montandon, in r.a.sf.w.r-j

Reply to: