Re: Distributability of Ruby's PDF::Writer
John Halton dijo [Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 11:53:29PM +0000]:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 09:11:19PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Gunnar Wolf:
> >
> > > 2- This is the main reason I contact -legal: The short license
> > > regarding the Adobe PostScript AFM files does mention 'for any
> > > purpose and without charge'. How would you interpret this?
> >
> > Compare the Adobe AFM license and the MIT license. 8-)
>
> Heh. Fair point. But the MIT licence is clearer: "Permission is hereby
> granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy...". No risk
> of confusion there. The Adobe licence, by contrast, reads like one of
> the cautionary examples of ambiguous drafting that you get taught at
> law school. :-)
Yup, that's precisely the point that made me bring this up on this
list - The license text is ambiguous at best... So, part of the
question would be where is this code used as well...
--
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF
Reply to: