[OT] RFC for DRM replacement

Giacomo A. Catenazzi cate at pixelized.ch
Mon Sep 1 18:23:38 UTC 2003

Mário Amado Alves wrote:

>Mark Rafn wrote:
>>Fundamentally, if the client is open-source, it can be 
>>modified, and the 
>>modified version can LIE and say it's the original version.  Anything 
>>which prevents this is not open-source.
>Many (most?, all?) open source licenses require authorship notices be
The opensources licenses usually don't requires explicity authorship
notices to be keep, but copyright law usually requires it.
So it is not a problem of open sources definitions,

BUT I think that open source movement should actively support that the
programs KEEPS copyright notices, else in case of license problem (change
of law, flaws, incompatibility with oper open source licenses) it whould 
to relicense, and as SCO case tell us, it could difficult to probe the 
origin of code.
So keeps the copyright notices!


license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

More information about the License-discuss mailing list