For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 9/28/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu> wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > On 9/27/07, Jon Rosenberg (PBM) <jonr at microsoft.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> >> like to propose a revision that I hope will get us closer to that goal.  I would like to
> >> get all of your feedback on the following name revisions:
> >> *       Microsoft Community License becomes Microsoft Reciprocal License
> >> *       Microsoft Permissive License becomes Microsoft Open License
> >> I look forward to your feedback.  Thanks.
> >
> > Reciprocal is good. Open is not so good. Consider:
> >
> > *       Microsoft Permissive License becomes Microsoft Academic License
>
> I prefer Open because Academic has essentially the same meaning as
> Permissive.

:-)

Your thinking is tainted by GNUish "totality" and "as a whole" silliness.

regards,
alexander.

--
"PJ points out that lawyers seem to have difficulty understanding the
GPL. My main concern with GPLv3 is that - unlike v2 - non-lawyers can't
understand it either."
                             -- Anonymous Groklaw Visitor