John,
We are in agreement.
My point was simple - - although my explanation was too laconic, sorry about
that - - you are far better of by keeping fair use issues out of the
license.
Rod
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "David Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jimmy Wales"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: Nupedia Open Content License
> "Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." wrote:
> >
> > A point of clarification on fair use. "Fair use" is based on copyright.
>
> Quite so. As you know (or should have known :-) ), I hold that an
> open-source license can only grant away the rights that the copyright
owner
> gets from the applicable copyright law, consequently ...
>
> > Hence, the license may control uses that would otherwise be deemed fair
uses
> > under the default rules of copyright.
>
> ... I deny this, since open-source licenses may not control use at all.
>
> --
> There is / one art || John Cowan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
> to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein
>
