comments on 2.0 license proposal

[Eric Friedman]

I'd like to suggest that the first section of the license contain a 
complete set of terms and definitions for the rest of the document.  
Some of these are already present ("License" "You," and so forth), but 
the ones that aren't seems most important -- "Work" and "Derivative 
work."

The first time "derivative works" appears is in 4.(a) and it is not 
defined;  it appears again in 4(b) chained to Work ("the Work and 
derivative works thereof"), but these terms are also not defined.

Then, in section 7, we get what looks like a definition of Derivative 
work, but I'm not sure that it extends to the earlier sections.

It also wasn't clear to me whether compiled object code of unmodified 
source counts as a derivative work or not.  Section 4 implies that it 
might be, but the definition in section 7 stipulates that you have 
modify the source to create a derivative work.  So, I'm not clear on 
what this license says about non-source distribution.

Eric Friedman