For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License

Chris Travers chris.travers at gmail.com
Sun Sep 30 19:17:33 UTC 2007


On 9/30/07, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> Chris Travers [mailto:chris.travers at gmail.com] wrote:
> > That is exactly what will happen if dislike of the source of a license
> is
> a factor in its approval.
>
> Here again you continue to misread what I said. The "dislike" of a source
> is
> not addressed in what I said, I thought I had been clear enough. I just
> spoke about the applicability of users' rights and obligations, i.e. the
> existence of unwritten, unexplicited clauses in the license, that can
> severely weaken their applicability to users, i.e. (unwritten) *implicit*
> rights and *implicit* requirements (that do exist just because one of the
> parties may think that these rights or obligations are protected by their
> national law, or implied by the terms used in the licence, or by the
> actual
> coverage of meaning of the term "licence").



 Do you think the OSI should rescind approval of the "New BSD" License which
has a similar clause?

If not, why should it be OK in that license, but not in the MS-PL license?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20070930/b19eb9a0/attachment.html>


More information about the License-discuss mailing list