Subject: Re: Fwd: OSI approves CPAL at OSCON 2007
From: "Alexander Terekhov" <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:36:51 +0200

On 7/31/07, Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Quoting Alexander Terekhov (alexander.terekhov@gmail.com):
> > > Wow, _love_ that completely irrelevant, non-sequitur straw man.
> >
> > I thought you were "just trying to get discussion on the merits or
> > flaws of the license" (the GPLv, that is).
>
> I honestly didn't think I'd made a particularly subtle point (and odds
> are, it was based on misinterpretation of a rather ambiguous upthread

Sorry, that was Michael Poole. My fault.

> post), but I'll restate it, anyway:
>
> Licences submitted to the OSI can be judged either OSD-compliant or not
> irrespective of the personal merits of the drafter.  In particular,
> such licences' OSD-compliance in no way hinges on the drafter's
> selection of targets for his/her public bloviating about alleged patents
> -- that sideshow being, as such, simply irrelevant to the question.
>
> > I'm just trying to help you. :-)
>
> Gee, thanks.  Curious minds want to know:  Have we perhaps just been
> treated to a "witnessing" of some kind?

You mean Pinkerton Doctrine and all that? :-)

regards,
alexander.