On Jul 24, 2008, at 6:56 PM, Malcolm Greene wrote:
> Any comments on the statements made in this article?
Sounds a lot like FUD to me. There are so many concerns raised about
the "risk" inherent in open source licenses, but there is not a single
OSI-approved license that is even close to as legally encumbering as a
Microsoft license. There is not a single case of a business being
taken to court over an OSI-licensed database.
Sure, there are some confusing aspects to these licenses, but nearly
all say something along the lines of "You can do whatever you like,
with the following exception(s): ...".
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
