[License-discuss] license committee
    John Cowan 
    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 
> back.
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
mailing list