[License-discuss] License compatibility - reg

[Ben Tilly]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Quoting Ben Tilly (btilly at gmail.com):
>
>> For example I point to the efforts of Allison Randal of The Perl
>> Foundation in the case Jacobsen v. Katzer in litigation regarding the
>> Artistic License.
>
> And, just another little point.  You _are_ aware that Randal, despite
> her many accomplishments, was not drafter of that licence, right?
> Assuming you knew that, then what are you going on about, Ben?

If you look back to my first email in this thread where I started off
with the phrase, "...where someone who in some way represents the
drafter..."

I was thinking about Allison, who in her position on The Perl
Foundation and as drafter of a much improved version of the Artistic
license does indeed represent Larry Wall's interests in this matter.
Doubly so since the initial precedent could have had serious
implications for Perl.

> And if hypothetically Alison Randal rather than Larry Wall _had_ been
> drafter of that disasterously awful licence -- and I'm rather glad for
> her sake that she wasn't -- why would the judge consider her a competent
> witness to testify about what was on Robert Jacobsen's and the other
> JRML coders' minds when they released Java code under AL 1.0?  Are they
> all golf buddies?  In the same Masonic lodge?  Group therapy?

What have I have said that could possibly support the impression that
I thought that the judge considered her a witness to Robert Jacobsen's
state of mind???

If you truly think that I was saying that, please re-read until you
understand that I was not.  After that we can discuss the merits of my
actual position.

(Note that Robert Jacobsen's state of mind was never a relevant
question.  His lawyers followed the standard FSF argument that
Katzer's violation of the license left him with no permission to do
things that he did which require permission under copyright law, and
therefore left him open to liability for copyright infringement.  As
http://jmri.sourceforge.net/k/docket/158.pdf demonstrates, this theory
did not initially fare well.)

> You see where I'm going with that, I hope.  You know, that whole
> 'competent and relevant' thing.  If not, I'd _truly_ better give this up.