Simplified Artistic License (A Proposed Compromise)
Russell Nelson
nelson at crynwr.com
Thu Oct 3 20:24:47 UTC 2002
Robert Samuel White writes:
> I can understand your point of view, I just wonder if you can see mine?
Of course. Do you understand that I see your point of view, and that
I'm trying to help you achieve your goal?
> I am an artist. I develop software, and that's what I love doing. I
> also love offering it to others, but I want to maintain some semblance
> of artistic control over my software.
> More than that, for me, I don't care whether or not people post their
> changes anywhere. I just care that they prominently indicate that the
> file was changed from its original version. And I don't want others
> using my name or the name of my software to endorse their products.
Then use the Academic Free License. It *specifically* denies anybody
the right to use your trademarks. Please read through the AFL and
tell me what parts are objectionable to you, and what's missing that's
objectionable to you.
http://opensource.org/licenses/academic.html
You may, if you wish, separately from the AFL, allow someone to use a
certification mark if you like the changes that they have made.
--
-russ nelson http://russnelson.com |
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | businesses persuade
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | governments coerce
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list