Fwd: OSI approves CPAL at OSCON 2007
alexander.terekhov at gmail.com
Tue Jul 31 21:36:51 UTC 2007
On 7/31/07, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Quoting Alexander Terekhov (alexander.terekhov at gmail.com):
> > > Wow, _love_ that completely irrelevant, non-sequitur straw man.
> > I thought you were "just trying to get discussion on the merits or
> > flaws of the license" (the GPLv, that is).
> I honestly didn't think I'd made a particularly subtle point (and odds
> are, it was based on misinterpretation of a rather ambiguous upthread
Sorry, that was Michael Poole. My fault.
> post), but I'll restate it, anyway:
> Licences submitted to the OSI can be judged either OSD-compliant or not
> irrespective of the personal merits of the drafter. In particular,
> such licences' OSD-compliance in no way hinges on the drafter's
> selection of targets for his/her public bloviating about alleged patents
> -- that sideshow being, as such, simply irrelevant to the question.
> > I'm just trying to help you. :-)
> Gee, thanks. Curious minds want to know: Have we perhaps just been
> treated to a "witnessing" of some kind?
You mean Pinkerton Doctrine and all that? :-)
More information about the License-discuss