Re: The "Do what you want" license and enforceability (was Re: licensing issues) by Russ Allbery- January 16, 2001 David Grove <petepetes-place.com> writes:> Satisfying Stillman might be good enough for the FSF and ODSN and GNU,> but that&39;s quite insubstantial and superficial.(It&39;s Stallman; I wouldn&39;t say anything, but I&39;ve seen that twice now.)Note that Stallman is already satisfied with the license on Perl itself,so there isn&39;t any need to change Perl&39;s license to satisfy those parties.In the context of satisfying the Open Source folks and the FSF,clarifications of the AL...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg342.html Re: Making sure "Perl" means "Perl" (was Re: licensing issues) by Russ Allbery- January 16, 2001 Ben Tilly <ben_tillyhotmail.com> writes:> "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhnebb.org> wrote:>> The GPL is not a contract, it&39;s a copyright license, just like both the>> proposed AL-2.0 and the original AL.> MY understanding after having talked to a number of licensing experts> about it in other places is that the GPL is both a copyright license and> a contract.> For instance look at item 5. A copyright license is a license written> by the copyright...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg341.html Re: licensing issues by Russ Allbery- January 16, 2001 Bradley M Kuhn <bkuhnebb.org> writes:> I don&39;t know if the Preamble I wrote if perfect, because I got very> little feedback on it, and all the RFCs this group submitted. Those> last two weeks before RFC&39;s were due, the traffic on this list was> basically dead, except for me posting revisions of RFCs. I hope that I> properly caught the spirit of the consensus properly, but without> feedback, that was a hard job.Yeah, and I apologize for my part of that. I tend to.http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg340.html Re: Making sure "Perl" means "Perl" (was Re: licensing issues) by Ben Tilly- January 15, 2001 "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhnebb.org> wrote:>Ben Tilly <ben_tillyhotmail.com> wrote:>> > I still think a copyright that offers a contract (ie the> > same structure as the GPL) can do it.>>The GPL is not a contract, it&39;s a copyright license, just like both the>proposed AL-2.0 and the original AL.MY understanding after having talked to a numberof licensing experts about it in other places isthat the GPL is both a copyright license and acontract.For...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg339.html Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL-only (was Re: licensing issues) by Ben Tilly- January 15, 2001 "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhnebb.org> wrote:...>Ben Tilly <ben_tillyhotmail.com> wrote:> > Could you point me at this policy My understanding from> > reading what Richard has written is that he would like it> > if all software were GPLed and GPL only.>>GNU&39;s policy on Perl licensing is on GNU&39;s main license page,>http:www.gnu.orgphilosophylicense-list.html. To quote it:>> The license of perl.> ...> We recommend you use.http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg338.html Re: The "Do what you want" license and enforceability (was Re: licensing issues) by David Grove- January 15, 2001 "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhnebb.org> wrote:>David Grove <petepetes-place.com> wrote:>> > Then there is no point in working with licenses at all. If licenseswill> > not be enforced through litigation and our desires for the Perllanguage> > cannot be enforced through public censure,>> I believe that the proposed (Artistic-2.0GPL) license is indeedenforceable> through litigation, or through cease and desist orders. I think thereare> too many...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg337.html Re: no one is asking for Perl to be GPL-only (was Re: licensingissues) by Chris Nandor- January 15, 2001 At 16:42 -0500 01.15.2001, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:>For example, I&39;d like to see CPAN.pm warn you if you are about to>install a module which will, licensing-wise, force you down a GPL-only>or AL-only fork when you use it in your programs.As long as it is an option, sure, some people would probably dig it. Butit would annoy me greatly if it were that way on my system and I couldn&39;tturn it off with a flag in CPAN::Config. It would probably annoy me if itwas on by default, too. ...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg336.html The "Do what you want" license and enforceability (was Re: licensing issues) by Bradley M. Kuhn- January 15, 2001 David Grove <petepetes-place.com> wrote:> Then there is no point in working with licenses at all. If licenses will> not be enforced through litigation and our desires for the Perl language> cannot be enforced through public censure,I believe that the proposed (Artistic-2.0GPL) license is indeed enforceablethrough litigation, or through cease and desist orders. I think there aretoo many problems with the original Artistic to make it enforceable, andthat&39;s one of the reasons I..http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg335.html intent of a non-legally binding licensing charter (was Re: licensing issues) by Bradley M. Kuhn- January 15, 2001 Chris Nandor <pudgepobox.com> wrote:> I think the purpose of such a "charter" should be to inform rather than> punish supposed offenders. I agree. We want people to understand why the perl license is what it is,and how it is ok for them to use it.While lawyers tend to go right for the legal "heart of the matter",friendly, non-legally binding statements accompanying licenses statingintent can certainly go a long way in making people feel comfortable withthe...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg334.html Re: licensing issues by Bradley M. Kuhn- January 15, 2001 Russ Allbery <rrastanford.edu> wrote:> Perhaps we want a Perl Manifesto that lays out our base goals in plain> English, separate from any licensing scheme.FWIW, I tried to at least state the goals in plain English of the ArtisticLicense only in the Preamble of proposed AL-2.0. Of course, that&39;s onlyhalf the manifesto, since we choose a dual license.I don&39;t know if the Preamble I wrote if perfect, because I got very littlefeedback on it, and all the RFCs this group...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.licenses/2001/01/msg333.html |