Subject: RE: Academic Free License
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:42:48 -0700

David Johnson wrote:
> Other than the patent 
> clause (2) I 
> see no reason why anyone would want to adopt this instead of 
> other widely 
> used licenses.

The patent clause was originally the only change I was going to make.  I
believe an explicit patent clause is essential in a software license and
it shouldn't be a license by implication.  

As I got into it, I realized I wanted to clean up other areas of the
BSD, MIT, UofI/NCSA and Apache licenses and try to write one license
that could replace them all and be "templatized" in a vendor-neutral
way.  

If the community doesn't want to use it, that's their prerogative.

/Larry

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3