[License-review] veto against Unlicence

[McCoy Smith]

And (d) the assertion that this passage:

"Anyone is free to copy, modify, publish, use, compile, sell, or distribute this software, either in source code form or as a compiled
binary, for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, and by any means."

Is not a license.

Because if that’s true, MIT and BSD are also not licenses.

> On May 13, 2020, at 11:38 AM, Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5/13/2020 2:03 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> 
>> On 5/11/20 1:25 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>>>> The courts are unlikely to assign him one against his wishes.
>>> Wrong, at least for the part of the world not USA.
>>> 
>> Can you get a European or other non-US attorney to back you up on this?
>> 
>> We're considering accepting the Unlicense on the basis that more than
>> one attorney has said that they have no objections to it, and no
>> attorney has objected.  Despite the enthusiasm of your arguments, you
>> are not an attorney, yet your arguments rest on legal grounds.
>> 
>> If you truly want to block the unlicence from acceptance, the way to do
>> it is to get a qualified attorney to back up your assertion that (a)
>> release into public domain is meaningless in several jurisdictions, and
>> (b) violation is a statutory crime even without prosecution.
>> 
>> Otherwise, you've said your piece but been outvoted.
>> 
> I would add to the list (c), a court might hold that, in the absence of
> an effective dedication to the public domain, a user would not have a
> defense to a claim of infringement based on the clear statement of the
> uses the author has identified in the document as permitted.
> 
> Pam
> 
> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chestek Legal
> PO Box 2492
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> 919-800-8033
> pamela at chesteklegal.com
> www.chesteklegal.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
> 
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org