Request for approval: EUPL (European Union Public Licence)

Russ Nelson nelson at
Sun Mar 16 05:22:10 UTC 2008

Russ Nelson writes:
 > Well then we should perhaps stick to realistic risks, then, eh?

Maybe I should be more gentle, Matthew.  In the USA, there are laws
against fraud (seeking commercial gain through misrepresentation).
Should the submittors of the EUPL actually have submitted a license
which is different to the extent you propose, they open themselves up
to legal charges of fraud, seeking to misuse our valuable intellectual
property, for which we would not doubt find multiple lawyers willing
to take on such a high-profile case for a share of the settlement.

Not to mention the fact that people actually speak the languages into
which the EUPL will be translated, and they'll care about Open Source
Definition compliance just as much as you do.  They'll read the
licenses and if they find any funny business, they'll be sure to let
us know.  To the extent that nobody speaks that language or reads that
license, that means that the harm would be greatly reduced.

So, worry about things that might happen on the sly.  Don't worry
about extremely public misbehavior which will be caught on day one.

--my blog is at   | 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 mailing list