> Rudy Lippan wrote: > > > So what I would like to do is tie the license of the software to the user > > of the software respecting the licenses of the community-distributed > > components > > they use, whether or not the individual component is eligible for copyright > > protection. > > > > You can't have a licence unless some rights are restricted without it. > If there really is no intellectual property in the components you > mention, they don't need, and can't have a licence.
There may not be intellectual property in the components; however, there is work involved in their creation. As such, I think it would be fair to be able to attribute the creator some level of control over the use use of the product. License may be the wrong term here, but the idea is the same. I really get the idea of the "License" not being binding, but if someone were to "Tag" or identify tag the work as "non-commercial", then it could not be used within the program for commercial purposes without violating the license of the program itself. I give you free use of a copy machine, but state that as a condition of use, you can't copy any of the books on shelf #3, even though a) I don't own the books and b) they are in the public domain. -r _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss