AW: AW: For Approval: Some License Or Another
Ian Lance Taylor
ian at airs.com
Tue Nov 30 18:40:17 UTC 2004
"Axel Metzger" <metzger at mpipriv-hh.mpg.de> writes:
> >Perhaps it would help if you stated your goals more clearly. If your
> >goal is a version of the GPL which is fully supported by German and
> >European law, then automatic license update seems orthogonal to that.
> >The regular GPL does not have automatic update--as you know, the usual
> >GPL phrasing is "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option)
> >any later version." So your goal is not simply a version of the GPL
> >supported by German and European law. So what is your goal?
> No, Ian, to my point of view you are mixing up to branches of the discussions
> we had here.
I did not intend to. I deliberately set aside the issue of whether
new licenses are required for German and European law, because I know
nothing about it. Thanks for the references to articles, but my
personal interest in learning about this is low.
> The goal by writing the GFSL is - to make it short - to write a Free Software
> license that is legally valid under German/European law, that provides
> inventions where necessary or wishful, and that gives the power to change the
> license to a democratic authority - this is the license board of the GFSL.
OK, you can clearly meet that goal without the automatic license
update. Since you will have to remove it to gain OSI approval, and
since OSI approval seems to matter to you, I recommend that you remove
The OSI has historically approved any license which is deemed to meet
the OSD. There are regular grumbles about license proliferation, and
indeed I too think it is a problem, but that has never yet prevented
the OSI from approving a license which was otherwise acceptable.
More information about the License-discuss