Forrest J. Cavalier III wrote:
> Look, if you have no permission to use the term "pronoic" > then you may not legally use it. Not so. Clause 5 says there is no right to use the term *in the name of the derivative work* without permission. Clause 4 encourages its use, with or without permission, *in promotional material about the work*. These are two different uses. If the pseudocode is correct, my reformulation a few minutes ago is (close to) correct too. > I dislike pseudo code analogies when it comes to law and > licenses. (You understand Godel's proofs, so I don't have to > tell you why.) I don't think you have pseudocoded version > 1.2 either. I think he has pseudocoded what he wants, which I have then put into prose. > Be careful. I am beginning to think that your interest is > playing a game with license discuss, and that you have no > interest in OSI approval. I don't believe so. -- John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.reutershealth.com I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_ -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
