On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 03:35:44PM -0700, Edward Craig wrote:
> > Why the wheel reinvent?
>
> Stipulate that SCO wins and invalidates the GPL. We'd a new
> license for Free Software. Why not Justin's?
This is impossible. If the GPL fails to stand up to legal scrutiny, the
work covered falls back upon the standard license terms: All Rights
Reserved. If SCO wins, they lose. ;)
> Besides, we haven't invented every possible wheel.
I've seen a lot of licenses written by non-lawyers to simplify the GPL. I
will say only that if you wish to reinvent the wheel, it should not be a
square one.
For Smash Something Interactive, we are considering the prospect of
writing our own license. Ours shall be, again, a distilling of the GPL
down to its basic terms, but with a twist: From its release date, the
license shall have a duration of five years. After that time, it shall
revert to very different terms, described below:
1. You may reproduce verbatim copies of the software.
2. You may reproduce modified versions of the software
3. You may charge a fee or royalty for the software.
4. You may sublicense the software, in whole or in part, to other
parties.
(In other words, the software reverts to "Public Domain" after 5 years, or
as close as we can legally get to it.)
--
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Do not write in this space
Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act
rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but we rather have those
because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence,
then, is not an act but a habit.
-- Aristotle
_______________________________________________
EuG-LUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
