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

[Pamela Chestek]

On 5/2/2019 12:32 PM, VanL wrote:
> > You've defined Public Performance more broadly, then added a
> specific limitation in the context of Modified Work, i.e., only those
> works that consist of publicly performing an interface. It's s simple
> fix, you just need to change the definition of Modified Work so it
> doesn't further limit the scope of Modified Work: "'Modified Work'
> means any work containing, directly combining with, derivative of, or
> Publicly Performing [strike "an interface"] included in or derived
> from the Work."
>
> I understand this now, thanks. I can swap out "an interface," for
> something like "elements of". But don't I need something that
> indicates that not the entire original work might be present (or
> publicly performed) in a modified work? 
Yes, just striking the wording makes it awkward (I was leaving that for
you to figure out!). I don't see any flaw in using "elements of," it's
not narrowing.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com
www.chesteklegal.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190502/ceea1fd5/attachment.html>