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

Re: Is OSL 2.0 compliant with DFSG?

On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 07:23:06PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > However, I do agree that it's not necessary to fight this battle right
> > now, as the OSL 2.0 is defective in other, less controversial, respects.
> I think it's not controversial that the OSL "software patent" clause is
> overbroad.  Even if software patent retaliation clauses in general are
> acceptable, termination clauses based on patents "applicable"  -- but not
> actually "applied" -- to software potentially discriminate against all
> holders of legitimate patents.  Everyone seems to agree about this, at
> least.

Well, I'm not going to argue with you over whether something is
controversial or not.  :)  If it is, it should be easy to demonstrate
ostensively, and since I have no citations to offer, I'll stipulate to
your assertion -- at least for the time being.  :)

G. Branden Robinson                |    It's like I have a shotgun in my
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    mouth, I've got my finger on the
branden@debian.org                 |    trigger, and I like the taste of
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    the gunmetal. -- Robert Downey, Jr.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: