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

Re: GNU or Open Source Licensing agreenemt.

Please do not CC me.  Good rule of thumb: unless the Reply-To or
Mail-Followup-To tells you to send elsewhere, don't CC it when you're

Alvin Oga <aoga@ns.Linux-Consulting.com> writes:

> On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> There's not 40 GPLs, there's one. 
> version 1 and version 2 ... can be counted as 1 or 2 ??

The difference between the two is epsilon.

>> > and what happens when you mix and match various licenses together ... :-)
>> Don't.  Life's too short to deal with some random developer's
>> licensing bogosity.
> as soon as one loads mozilla .. you have a mix of gpl and mpl

True enough.  But just because it's well-known doesn't make it a Good
Thing(tm).  If that were the case, we'd all be happy that the MS-EULA
is so common because it's so common.  Its manageable because both the
GPL and the MPL fall into being DFSG-free, which is Good Enough(tm)
for most people.

> but .. i say just leave it up to the lawyers to decide

That's more or less my opinion about the whole thing.  The non-free
stuff I make a case-by-case assessment on it if I really need it, the
free and contrib stuff I don't think a whole lot about when it comes
to licensing, because I know Debian's social contract all but promises
I won't get boned.

> and all these licenses that very few people read and understand 
> will become a bigger problem 
> ( the point, its a big mess of various licenses )

Which is why Debian's social contract defines what is Free.  That way
the users don't have to grind through the license issues alone.
There's legal types that volunteer their time on debian-legal sorting
all that BS out for us (thank God).

Paul Johnson
Linux.  You can find a worse OS, but it costs more.

Attachment: pgpNI3H3FDm9e.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: