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

Re: licensing of XMPP specifications

Ben Finney wrote:
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> writes:

How about this (to be formatted in bold in the HTML, though we'd
lose that in ASCII)....

Less shouty, so that's a good thing. Whether it passes the test of
"conspicuous" as required under U.S. UCC, I don't know.

The capitalization follows that found in the Apache License, version


A promising sign. I would want to know the Apache foundation's legal
theory on using a mixture of shouty and readable text while conforming
to the above legal code.

Whether you (or someone else) actually spends the time and effort to
research this is a matter of prioritising the conflicting demands:
readability of the plain text version, conformance with legal codes,
and finalising the license text.

Well, like people used to say about IBM, "nobody ever got fired for using shouty capitals". That pretty much explains the caution about trying anything else...


Peter Saint-Andre

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply to: