[Approval request] CMGPL licence

Rui Miguel Seabra rms at greymalkin.yi.org
Wed Nov 7 20:47:14 UTC 2001

On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 09:24:32PM +0100, Marcel van der Boom wrote:
> Granted,...maybe. This is a difficult matter. If I
> hired a lawyer and said to him. "I want this license, but in different 
> wording and only this article removed" what would be the result of this?
> How much wording must be changed?

Probably a lot, if not all.
GPL's wording has been _very_ carefull to mean exactly what it means, and has
been the object of study for many years for some lawyers dedicated to libre

They are quite very used to it, and each and every clause has it's importance.
Removing a clause or part of it may create loopholes not intended for its

> If I hired the lawyer and drafted in my own words the
> rights and obligations of the GPL for him without him knowing the GPL 
> (which is very likely sad enough) What would be the result?

Some license loosely inspired on the GPL, but almost totally different.

Why don't you check The FAQ? [ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html ]

> Thanks. This does however illustrate the problem. I want to create a 
> license which is basically the same (thus supporting the goal of the 
> FSF) but I would be forced to use "proprietary" means. One of the 
> virtues of Free software is to minimize redundancy when creating the 
> same functionality isn't it?

I wonder if for what you need the LGPL wouldn't suffice?

> The customers object to the preamble, and we didn't like 3c because it
What did the costumers not like at all?
The first sentences, for instance?

> add anything. It stimulates distribution (albeit non-commercial) without 
> source code.

... provided that you <<Accompany it with the information you received as
to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. >>

Hugs, rms
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20011107/aadcdf4e/attachment.sig>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list