Cygwin license (GPL + exception) question

[M. Drew Streib]

On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 03:19:22PM -0700, Andy Tai wrote:
> lawsuit, how can this be resolved?  Can the OSI be
> counted to provide support for proving the license is
> not Open Source? Or the OSI does not have the resource

<I am not a lawyer>
While the OSI may provide a witness in this case, which may or may not
be helpful, the license terms are still up to Cygnus. The OSD was simply
included by reference in their license. It is up to Cygnus to defend
the license if necessary.

Since the Cygnus license says 'meets the Open Source Definition', they
are relying on that definition being legally clear, and something that
they can present against in a court of law. I believe that they are
in the same situation now as they would be if they simply included 
the entire definition in their own license.

This might have been different had Cygnus decided to require an
'OSI-approved license'.

Please do not make legal decisions based on my opinions, but get a lawyer
if you plan to use this information.
</I am not a lawyer>

-drew

-- 
M. Drew Streib <dtype at dtype.org> | http://dtype.org/
FSG <dtype at freestandards.org>    | Linux International <dtype at li.org>
freedb <dtype at freedb.org>        | SourceForge <dtype at sourceforge.net>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20010910/55d84a28/attachment.sig>