License committee report for March 2008
nelson at crynwr.com
Thu Mar 13 21:26:35 UTC 2008
Harlan Stenn writes:
> > The board voted to accept the report with one change:
> > We request that the NTP License be changed so that the license (as a
> > license model) uses generic language for the copyright holder (Mills)
> > and trademark holder (UDel). Obviously the NTP License as used by NTP
> > should continue to say Mills and UDel.
> As long as you aren't asking me to ask Dave to change *his* license that
> should be no problem.
Well, see, here's the deal. We actually talked about posting the
license as a model. But then we wanted to give you the opportunity to
create a model yourself, since that's what we've done in the past.
And we didn't want to create confusion between our "NTP License" which
is a model, and the Mills instance of the "NTP License".
> If you want to change the *model* copy, feel free. If you want explicit
> permission from Dave about this I'm happy to ask him.
I think that you could copy that web page to another one, and insert
generic language, point us to that as the NTP License model, and then
everybody would be happy.
> And by my recollection, the original NTP license (before the "and
> without fee" -> "with or without fee" change) was ripped from the old
> MIT license. After that change it agreed with (word for word) the ISC
> license from some recent verison of BIND (before their latest change to
> appease the FSF).
I looked at the MIT license as we have it recorded and, no, they're
substantially different. The W3C license is closer but has its own
set of changes.
--my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | Software that needs
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | documentation is software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | that needs repair.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog |
More information about the License-review