[License-discuss] license committee
cowan at mercury.ccil.org
Fri Mar 9 17:49:25 UTC 2012
Bruce Perens scripsit:
> They would only be different if the organization became politically
> capable to dis-recommend licenses.
Quite so. I see no sign of that happening. OSI, unlike FSF, has always
been seen as a neutral fact-finder.
> I think my favorite is probably still the SIL font license, where it
> says "The requirement for fonts to remain under this license does not
> apply to any document created using the Font Software." As far as I can
> tell, that allows you to convert a font to any license or no license,
> and then extract it again, and the SIL license doesn't magically come
Fonts are not documents. What's meant is that the license doesn't apply
to a document created using the font. Even if you put a full type specimen
into a document and then extracted the characters from it, you'd wind up
with a font again and the SIL would apply.
John Cowan cowan at ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan
Sound change operates regularly to produce irregularities;
analogy operates irregularly to produce regularities.
--E.H. Sturtevant, ca. 1945, probably at Yale
More information about the License-discuss