Eiffel Forum License

[Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.]

I have not read the BSD licenses in a while, but I know that the FSF/Richard
Stallman argues that they have no copyleft provision. Again, the absence of
a copyleft provision in a public license is not a critical failure to
maintaining an open source/free software project, but the absence of
copyleft does relinguish a degree of control over the ability to keep the
software completely free. BTW, I do think copyleft provisions should be used
only when consistent with the objectives of the copyright holder. Copyleft
is not essential to open source/free software.

Someone, I have forgotten who, sorry, made an  interesting comment about the
enforceability of GPLs, generally. I agree that it is an open question
whether a court would enforce some public licenses. If a license lacks
consideration, it's enforceability is dubious and some developers may
violate the terms of the license knowing that the copyright holder has
little chance of prevailing in court.

I suspect, though, that most GPLs are flying below the radar of litigation
for various reasons. E-commerce is till considered novel. On the other hand,
a successful software application attracts the attention of many people. In
that regard, the copyright holder is going to want to have in place a
reliable GPL, which makes a forum like this one more than worthwhile (but
not a substitute for a lawyer, who may take the time to provide careful
assistance).

IMHO, most, if not all, GPLs will need to undergo revisions, if they are to
be reliable in the U.S. There seems to be little doubt that UCITA soon will
become the law enough states to make most online software licenses conform
to the reality of UCITA...either by attempting to avoid UCITA or by grabbing
for its "protections."  Consequently, I think this is a rather appropriate
time to discuss the BSD and other public licenses.

Rod


___________________________________
Rod Dixon



> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Johnson [mailto:david at usermode.org]
> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2000 3:00 PM
> To: Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.; license-discuss at opensource.org
> Subject: RE: Eiffel Forum License
>
>
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2000, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
> > I understand. Certainly, you, as the copyright holder, may impose as few
> > restrictions on users as you desire. Nothing wrong with that. There is
> > another issue, however. Copyleft is an attempt by some people
> who believe in
> > "free" software to keep the software free for everyone. Copyleft is one
> > effective way to do that, and that is my reason for mentioning it.
>
> Of course!
>
> However, when you asked your question "your license has no copyleft
> provision. Why?", it was in reference to a a license worded very much
> like the BSD/MIT licenses. The question seemed such a non-sequitur that
> I replied giving one possible reason.
>
> --
> David Johnson...
> _____________________________
> http://www.usermode.org
>