From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> OK, I think I understand slightly better but our license refers to > "this software" not to any specific file. IANAL, IAN-Roy, IAN-ASF, but... The license does not give any indication of what "this software" is. i.e. It doesn't define the scope of the piece of work to which it applies. Thus when Roy said: 'The problem with the 1.1 license is that it lacked a way to define the scope of what was covered beyond "this file".' It means just that - the 1.1 license doesn't define what it applies to. It refers vaguely to "THIS SOFTWARE", but that's all. The concern is that if it is not directly included within the source files then the scope of "THIS SOFTWARE" is unclear. Does it include all the source? What about the included jars? What if those jars are not under the ASF license? This not the case in the GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt) because Term 0 of the GPL defines (ot attempts to define) the scope of the work. My understanding is that License 2.0 will include a similar item (but I'm basing that on guesswork). While it should be clear to normal people what "this software" means, lawyers have a nasty habit of not seeing the obvious :) NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may contain copyright material of Macquarie Bank or third parties. If you are not the intended recipient of this email you should not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this e-mail or any attachments, and should destroy all copies of them. Macquarie Bank does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or any attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Macquarie Bank. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
