Subject: RE: For Approval: Some License Or Another
From: Alvin Oga <alvin@Mail.Linux-Consulting.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:35:18 -0800 (PST)


On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Lawrence Rosen wrote:

> I've avoided commenting on some recent licenses partly because this
> "inventing as you go" experience turns me off. And from what I am told
> privately, many of the lawyers on this list tend to tune out when the
> discussion turns to non-lawyers debating "what if I changed X to Y and A to
> B...." There are just too many open source licenses, and too little time, to
> give that much attention.

i tend to avoid those discussions too unless it's ones that was reviewed
by a licensed and open-source savy attorneym that was paid to review it,
or reasonably knowledgeable posters, otherwise, one can change documents
a gazillion different ways
	and even if its blessed and approved by one attorney or group
	of attorneys, it won't necessarily mean it will hold water in
	court, and/or hold steam in all courts of law across the planet

> Which brings up the larger question: Why do we keep receiving requests for
> approval of new licenses? Does anyone seriously believe that our customers
> and distributors can keep up with this barrage? 

i don't see why the "new license" needs to be "approved" ?? what would the
point be that it's approved ??
	- it'd already be semi blessed by the attorney that wrote the
	"license"

one could start yet another branding of "open source" licenses that
address their needs and requirements ?

have fun
alvin

- my pet pieve of existing generic licenses, not many/any goes into 
  enough details for "not for commercial use" as "commercial" use
  can be defined too many different ways and a predefined venue for
  disputes