APL license - What about the enforced logos?

[Matthew Flaschen]

Rick Moen wrote:
> Actually, you're running right into the point I was trying to make:
> This is law, not coding.  Words need to be read _in_ the applicable
> legal context; failing to do so leads many software-oriented
> commentators to commit crazy talk.  I keep seeing this happen, and it's
> gotten old.
> 

First of all, OSI is approving licenses for software-oriented
commentators and software developers, so they should be making licenses
these people can understand.  Second, it may not be too ambiguous, but
we don't need to encourage ambiguity either.  This license is only being
used by one company (so far as I can tell), and it'd be better to ask
them to change it (if they submitted it), then have generations of
coders wonder if they can import the code into a text interface.

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20061107/f5aadfc9/attachment.sig>