To OSI License Discussion subscribers,
>> From: Robert Samuel White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> From: Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Larry, I can't afford an attorney, as you already know. And I cannot
>> use one of the existing licenses because it does not feel right to me
>> to do so.
>
on Tue, Oct 08, 2002, Robert Samuel White ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Larry, I can't afford an attorney, as you already know. And I cannot
> use one of the existing licenses because it does not feel right to me
> to do so.
These are constraints imposed by you. You're welcome to live with the
their inner wisdom, in
these matters. I believe that this discussion has long reached its
usefulness and should be ended now.
-Original Message-
From: Lawrence E. Rosen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 3:45 PM
To: 'Robert Samuel White'; [EMAIL PROTEC
> - First and foremost, I want a license which is less
> complicated than the existing licenses.
You're entitled to that, but we've warned you to consult an attorney.
"Complexity" is related to "enforceability." Attorneys will almost
certainly not recommend your license to their clients because
,
outdated?
Refer to the original post with this same subject line.
Thank you.
-Original Message-
From: Nathan Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 8:38 PM
To: Robert Samuel White
Subject: Re: Simplified Artistic License [osd]
To Robert Samuel White,
>>
Okay, here is the license modified to (hopefully) meet full OSD
compliance. It is available here as well:
http://enetwizard.sourceforge.net/license.html.
Below is also the license as a template, which is what I would request
for approval.
eNetwizard Content Management Server License
(Simpli
6 matches
Mail list logo
