OVPL summary

Alex Bligh alex at alex.org.uk
Wed Sep 14 17:59:15 UTC 2005

--On 14 September 2005 10:43 -0700 "Wilson, Andrew" 
<andrew.wilson at intel.com> wrote:

> I agree.  My concerns about OVPL could be addressed by making sec. 3.3
> optional
> and allowing a licensee to opt in by returning a signed copy to the ID.

Sadly that would not address the fundamental requirement of the license.
IE if we were trying to do that, we'd just use (say) CDDL and copyright
assignment. I think we've already been around the "optional" argument,
and concluded that an OVPL with an optional 3.3 is pointless.


More information about the License-discuss mailing list