[License-discuss] License which requires watermarking? (Attribution Provision)

Bruce Perens bruce at perens.com
Wed Jan 2 02:58:19 UTC 2013

Would that we all had infinite budgets for going to court :-) But short 
of having them, many businesses choose, quite sensibly, to err on the 
conservative side of this sort of issue and will honor the license 
whether or not a court would make them do so. This will also get them 
through an M&A intellectual property audit in better shape than otherwise.

I do know a company that spent money, including on me, to argue just 
this sort of issue recently. They spent more than most businesses would 
be able to endure.



On 01/01/2013 05:23 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Really? That's not wise. How would the choice of license affect the 
> *legal* determination of whether the resulting work is or is not a 
> derivative work for which source code must be disclosed?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bruce.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 266 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20130101/7a1cc0d7/attachment.vcf>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list