On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 02:48:38PM -0400, John Cowan wrote: > Chad Perrin scripsit: > > > Before pushing such a change, perhaps we should consider the meaning of > > Apache 2.0 License section 4, subsections 2 and 4. There's more to > > "permissive" than "isn't copyleft", and Apache is a somewhat less > > permissive license. > > Those both have to do with making sure attribution (and blame) go to > the right people. I don't see them as serious restrictions on reuse.
Like many of the worst laws contemplated in US Congress, it specifies implementation rather than principle. This can cause problems, such that there are cases where it is inappropriate to use the license based on those clauses. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
