[CAVO] Definition of "open source software"

[Lawrence Rosen]

> so why not define it as copyleft 

(btw, I care about copyleft, not about GPL specifically)

 

I care about copyleft also. I believe that there are advantages to copyleft software for these purposes. See attached. Nothing has changed my mind since 9/28/2016. /Larry

 

From: Brian J. Fox [mailto:bfox at opuslogica.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 3:26 PM
To: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com>
Cc: CAVO <cavo at lists.opensource.org>; Alan Dechert <dechert at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CAVO] Definition of "open source software"

 

I don’t get it — why not?  The constitution is declaring that the license must be "open source," so why not define it as copyleft (btw, I care about copyleft, not about GPL specifically).





On Jan 15, 2018, at 2:51 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com <mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com> > wrote:

 

But the California Constitution shouldn't declare that the open source license MUST be copyleft.

 

Thanks,

 

Brian

--

Brian J. Fox

Founder/CEO

Opus Logica, Inc.

A: 901 Olive St., 93101

O: 76-BAFFLE-76

C: 805.637.8642

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/cavo_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20180115/daf1f214/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen at rosenlaw.com>
Subject: Open source election software
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 09:25:48 -0800
Size: 33919
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/cavo_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20180115/daf1f214/attachment-0001.mht>