Question on OSD #5

Chris Travers chris.travers at gmail.com
Fri Dec 14 02:19:44 UTC 2007


On Dec 13, 2007 5:38 PM, Tzeng, Nigel H. <Nigel.Tzeng at jhuapl.edu> wrote:

>  > larry rosen wrote:
> >Statutes and regulations always trump the license. I no longer believe
> that
> >provisions like Jabber s. 5 and MPL 1.1 s. 4 are actually needed in open
> >source licenses. None of my licenses say that any more. Licensees are
> simply
> >expected to obey the law and not to distribute software if doing so would
> >violate the law. It is not the role of the license to educate about that
> >obvious fact.
>
> >/Larry
>
> I guess my question is if a statute says "you can only release information
>
> to people with the correct clearance" you can still reuse the software
> even if you
> do not have rights to do so unless you release code to downstream users
> who
> may not have the correct clearance to see the code?
>

If you are really that concerned about it, why don't you take a license like
the LGPL since such components could be distributed in separate libraries?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20071213/f2cfc525/attachment.html>


More information about the License-discuss mailing list