Francesco Poli wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:27:16 +0100 Mark Weyer wrote: > >> Thanks for your reply. > > You're welcome! :) > >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 05:43:05PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > [...] > In other words, you want to maximize compatibility with other copyleft > licenses and still have a copyleft license... > I think these two requirements are _very_ hard to satisfy at the same > time; it could be that they are actually incompatible with each other. > Maybe something like "copyleft-ed" BSD license. Eg. standard two clauses, and an additional clause about enforcing source redistribution of your software even if it is part of a larger project (open-sourced or not). > [...] > The GNU GPL is not far from being such a license: it talks all the way > about a "Program", but defines this term as "any program or other > work" (GPLv2, Section 0.) or as "any copyrightable work" (GPLv3, > Section 0.). > Hence you may think "Work" whenever you read "Program" in the GPL text. > Didn't know that. I thought the whole push for Artistic and CC licenses were that all the other licenses (including GPL) were all about software. > [...] > Same disclaimers as before: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP. > Erhhhmm..... What do these stand for? I can only guess IANADD from mentors list - does it stand for I am not a Debian Developer? What about the others?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature