Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License
From: "Mahesh T. Pai" <paivakil@yahoo.co.in>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 13:04:59 +0530

Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. said on Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 07:13:10PM -0500,:

 > Public   License.    In   addition,   section    3(D)   is   nearly
 > incomprehensible.  For example,  the  phrase "only  do  so under  a
 > license that  complies with  this license" does  not seem  all that
 > permissive  to  me.  More  fundamentally,  I  am  unsure  how  that
 > provision is intended to work? To review section 3 fairly,

Even  been part  of the  long flame  wars about  GPL  compatibility?

My point is, GPL too has such requirements.

There  are other  (better) reasons  to rejct  this license,  which are
pointed out in a different post.
 
-- 
Mahesh T. Pai

REVOLUTION, n. An abrupt change in the form of misgovernment.