rms at 1407.org claiming "licenses aren't contracts" and that...

[Lawrence Rosen]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> This is ridiculous.  The list is not for general copyright law
> discussions, nor for general license discussions, nor for general
> contract discussions.  It exists so that licenses submitted to OSI can
> be discussed before approval.  There are obviously occasional
> discussions unrelated that topic, but they should be kept to a minimum.

Some discussions here may indeed be ridiculous (and I ignore many of them),
but where do the OSI rules state those restrictions on list content? Some
people, I fear, are being a little too censoring. Are you trying to save me
from the trolls? Then implement better tools than email that make it easier
to ignore things I don't want to hear.... 

Quite frankly, Alexander Terekhov has sent us lots of interesting links that
are perhaps more interesting to some than having Matt or me repeat our own
oft-stated opinions. :-) That doesn't mean I agree with Alexander, or even
that I want to hear more from him. Censor not so that ye be not censored.

/Larry


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Flaschen [mailto:matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:06 AM
> To: License Discuss
> Subject: Re: rms at 1407.org claiming "licenses aren't contracts" and that...
> 
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Why not discuss here on *license discuss* forum (not license approval
> > or some such)
> 
> This is ridiculous.  The list is not for general copyright law
> discussions, nor for general license discussions, nor for general
> contract discussions.  It exists so that licenses submitted to OSI can
> be discussed before approval.  There are obviously occasional
> discussions unrelated that topic, but they should be kept to a minimum.
> 
> If people are unable or unwilling to accept that license-discuss is for
> discussing licenses submitted for approval, we may need both a public
> list charter and a rename of the list to e.g license-approval-discuss
> (which better reflects the intention).
> 
> Matt Flaschen