Approval request - Poetic License

[Karsten M. Self]

on Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 07:52:04PM -0800, email at greglondon.com (email at greglondon.com) wrote:
> On Wed, 07 November 2001, David Johnson wrote:
> > On Wednesday 07 November 2001 05:00 pm, Chris Brien wrote:
> > > I sent this to license-approval at opensource.org,
> 
> > Although I may agree with some of your sentiments, a software
> > "license" is not the place to air them. 
> 
> well, on that point, he is simply following a bad precedence.
> 
> ;/
> 
> Mr. van der Boom just queried about getting a version of the GPL
> without the rant, er, preamble attached, and with a paragraph deleted
> from the appendix that gives one last poke in the eye to proprietary
> developers.

There's a crucial distinction:  the GPL questions _practice_ and
utilizes _law_.  The submitted "Poetic License" questions law.  What it
utilizes, I'm not sure.  As such, I don't see it as a license, in fact,
it says as much.

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>       http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?             Home of the brave
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/                   Land of the free
   Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org
Geek for Hire                     http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
-------------- 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/20011107/02048929/attachment.sig>