Chris Nandor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think the purpose of such a "charter" should be to inform rather than > punish supposed offenders. I agree. We want people to understand why the perl license is what it is, and how it is ok for them to use it. While lawyers tend to go right for the legal "heart of the matter", friendly, non-legally binding statements accompanying licenses stating intent can certainly go a long way in making people feel comfortable with the licensing scheme. Lawyers are people too, after all. ;) -- Bradley M. Kuhn - http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn
- Re: licensing issues Simon Cozens
- Re: licensing issues Chris Nandor
- Re: licensing issues Simon Cozens
- Re: licensing issues David Grove
- Re: licensing issues Dave Rolsky
- Re: licensing issues David Grove
- Re: licensing issues Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: licensing issues Russ Allbery
- Re: licensing issues David Grove
- Re: licensing issues Chris Nandor
- Re: licensing issues Bradley M. Kuhn
- Re: licensing issues Bradley M. Kuhn
- Re: licensing issues Russ Allbery
- feedback and the license of Per... Bradley M. Kuhn
- Re: feedback and the license of... Chris Nandor
- Re: licensing issues Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: licensing issues Ben Tilly
- Making sure "Perl" means "Perl" ... Bradley M. Kuhn
- Re: licensing issues John van V
- Re: licensing issues Ben Tilly
- Re: licensing issues David Grove