[License-review] For Approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License

[Smith, McCoy]

FWIW, there is a discussion of this question in the following article:  https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2046&context=btlj, specifically in Sections III.C.6 & III.C.7.

From: License-review [mailto:license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Perens via License-review
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 2:44 PM
To: License submissions for OSI review <license-review at lists.opensource.org>
Cc: Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com>
Subject: Re: [License-review] For Approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License

Let's try that again.

Van's response was a reply to this question:

> First, would you please discuss whether there is a sufficient public

> performance right for software defined in 17 USC 106 (4), (5) and (6)? I

> read your discussion of Public Performance and was not enlightened.*


Upon re-reading, it appears that Van read my question as asking whether software was copyrightable at all, and did not really answer the question about the public performance right. This is either misunderstanding, or squirrely lawyer stuff :-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190430/ce394f98/attachment-0001.html>