[License-discuss] The per se license constructor

[John Cowan]

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 10:05 AM Tzeng, Nigel H. <Nigel.Tzeng at jhuapl.edu>
wrote:

Again, speaking only for myself, but I find it interesting that the need
> for legal review is considered so important but when a practicing IP lawyer
> in a specific domain claims that certain license constructs are required to
> meet the required regulations for a governmental agency that laypersons can
> simply say “Nope” and that’s pretty much the end of that.
>

The "Nope" means "Nope, it doesn't conform to the OSD", not "Nope, it
doesn't conform to the regulations."  If the regulations prevent release as
open source, so be it.

And random practicing IP lawyers, like other lawyers, are used to drafting
documents that preserve their client's rights as opposed to giving them
away.  That can't be an easy thing to wrap one's head around.

-- 
John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
The work of Henry James has always seemed divisible by a simple dynastic
arrangement into three reigns: James I, James II, and the Old Pretender.
                --Philip Guedalla
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190317/9268557d/attachment.html>