A prototype License Wizard up and running

[Justin Clift]

John Cowan wrote:
> Bruce Perens scripsit:
> 
>>You can actually get this down to three licenses, with terms on 
>>derivative works classified as:
> 
> I thought of that, but GPL-compatibility is an issue to a lot of people.
> 
>>*Enforced sharing:* Terms must apply to all derivative works, and the 
>>license terms are such that callers of the code are considered 
>>derivative. This is what Rosen calls a /Reciprocal/ license in his book.
> 
> This is the FSF's view of the GPL, but not Rosen's view of it.

Hmmm.... should we look instead to the *legal* view of these things as 
more definitive?

Having a discussion about XYZ person's point of view having differences 
to ABC's point of view is kind of moot for us, when we have a 
specialised legal group (OSI & friends) possibly able to assist.

Right here and now speaking, from a "lets make an online OSI license 
guide" perspective, how do we structure the questions appropriately to 
guide people amongst the groups to a correct answer?


<snip>
> See, the wording won't help you.  It's a matter of whether you interpret
> works which include library works as derivative works or not, and that's
> in the purview of the law, not the license.

No worries.  See above reference to asking Laura's team for their 
thoughts on this.  It could be possible we make a specific jurisdiction 
license guide at first, look at how that's received, then consider other 
jurisdictions from there.

What do you think?

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

-- 
Executive Director
Digital Distribution Global Training Services Pty. Ltd.
Premier OpenOffice.org and StarOffice Online Training providers
http://www.digitaldistribution.com