Hi Larry, everybody, On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lro...@rosenlaw.com> wrote: > > > As for the expense and nuisance of lawyers reviewing "trivial" modification > in licenses, that's an education problem that OSI could address. Especially > valuable would be them teaching people about the foolishness of having > hundreds of variants on the BSD and MIT licenses that do almost nothing > legally or practically different under copyright than the original licenses.
I think there is an opportunity to tell people: your license is not exactly what it should be, so if possible, go an address it. However, there is a potentially legacy issue too, where updating the license might not be feasible. Ultimately, I agree with Larry. The OSI is a position to say: variants are not ok, don't modify licenses to replace words or sentences that you think are obviously equivalent (such as "program" and "programme" or the more challenging one replacing the "contributors" with their own name). And of course, don't add/remove entire sentences (like it is the case with MIT/X11, a total mess!!) -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss