[License-discuss] A modest proposal to reduce the number of BSD licenses

Russell Nelson nelson at crynwr.com
Wed Aug 19 16:14:43 UTC 2020

On 8/18/20 4:57 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:

> Lawrence Rosen dixit:
>> This has been proposed before. What is different now is that the Public
>> Software Fund is going to stand behind this process, and defend the
>> project's editor against lawsuits by any licensors who object to this
>> relicense.
>> I’m not convinced that “don’t need to worry” and the “Public Software
>> Fund” are sufficient reasons to violate the “no relicensing” rule of
>> law.
> The wording of most of the licences is also pretty clear:*these*  terms
> (their wording) is to be copied, not any equivalent one.

Yes, what I'm proposing goes against the law. The question is what harm 
is created and what benefit is created, not whether a law exists or not. 
If you think that every law is always obeyed, I don't know what to say 
to you. Legislation (and copyright is created by legislation) is not 
law. Law is immutable and inviolable. Otherwise ... it's not a law. 32 
ft/sec/sec is a law. 300,000m/s is a law. F=MA, E=IR, E=MC2, I2C, these 
are all laws which cannot be broken. Copyright is legislation and is 
frequently violated.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200819/bd796e73/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list