Subject: RE: OVPL summary
From: "Wilson, Andrew" <andrew.wilson@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:15:03 -0700

 Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:15:03 -0700
Alex Bligh wrote: 

> I think we've already been around the "optional" argument,
> and concluded that an OVPL with an optional 3.3 is pointless.

However, even an anti-license-proliferation "hawk" such as myself
would say that such an OVPL which combined a license with an optional
contributor's agreement in a single instrument would be novel
and not duplicative.

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center