The draft versions of the AFL and OSL are now stable. They have been
discussed on license-discuss for quite a while now. I believe I have
incorporated all concensus changes that were requested.
Will the OSI board approve them?
Latest versions of the licenses are at:
OSL 1.1:
Hi.
I would like to know if it's legal to put a perl interpreter (the
standard one) into a closed source commercial program (in C) in order to
allow users to add/modify program functionalities via perl scripting.
As I understand the artistic license
I would like to suggest that a license template like the one below be put
forward for approval by the OSI board.
This is not really intended for new software. Nevertheless it's pragmatic
to approve it since many OSD-compliant licenses follow this template.
Examples include Scintilla/SciTE,
It seems clear to me, yet another non-lawyer:
Derivative Works means derivative works based upon the Original Work, as
upposed to derivative works based upon Marvel Comics characters, or
derivative works based upon previously-unreleased Elvis tracks.
Prepare - it doesn't say to prepare yourself
Bruce Dodson top-posted:
It seems clear to me, yet another non-lawyer:
Derivative Works means derivative works based upon the Original Work, as
upposed to derivative works based upon Marvel Comics characters, or
derivative works based upon previously-unreleased Elvis tracks.
Since the
5 matches
Mail list logo
