[License-review] Non-binding straw poll: Do you think CC0 should be approved?

[Thorsten Glaser]

Karl Fogel dixit:

>If you wish to participate in this straw poll, please follow up to this

+1

• someone said “we have approved non-optimal things before”
• there are existing CC0 works out there which would benefit
• in general, patent danger does not come from OSS developers
  but third parties which are not licensors
• in the special case of CC0 being lobbied for not including
  a patent grant, motivation for this is probably not on
  software patents but on other patents related to research,
  since those CC0 users see the software not as the primary
  part of their publication
• a patent licence grant ought to be redundant as software
  patents are illegal anyway ;) (sadly, this doesn't match
  reality at the moment)

bye,
//mirabilos

PS: On which (OSI or other) list would I best raise a question
    about whether OSS licences can be revoked (most do not have
    an explicit “perpetual” clause), i.e. where would that be
    on-topic?
-- 
  “Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool.”
						-- Edward Burr