Hi Bruce, I'm glad you're starting to like the AFL. Please let us know if/when you actually use it. The discussion of the warranty of non-infringement of copyright can start with this article: www.rosenlaw.com/GL14.pdf I wrote this for my column in Linux Journal a few months ago. The response so far has been about 50-50 in favor of the warranty of non-infringement of copyright. /Larry Rosen > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Dodson [mailto:bruce_dodson@hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 6:02 PM > To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com; license-discuss@opensource.org > Subject: Re: Revised versions of the OSL and AFL > > > I like the revised AFL. It's getting to the point where I > may even use it. > > I have just one concern, and that is with the warranty of > copyright which appears in both of these licenses. I think > there must be a better way to achieve that - it smells like a > cludge to me - but since I'm not a lawyer I won't venture any ideas. > > It would be very helpful for me (and I assume for some > others) to see some public discussion of how / whether this > warranty would work in practice. > > If a discussion like that happens here, I promise to stay out of it! > > Bruce > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> > To: <license-discuss@opensource.org> > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 12:44 PM > Subject: Revised versions of the OSL and AFL > > > > New versions of the Open Software License (OSL) and the > Academic Free > > License (AFL) are now available for your review. They are > posted at: > > > > www.rosenlaw.com/osl1.1.html > > > > www.rosenlaw.com/afl1.2.html > > > > Both licenses now contain an Attribution Rights provision. > > > > Other minor changes have been made to clarify the language > and to make > > the licenses (a little) easier to read. > > > > /Larry Rosen > > > > -- > > license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3 > > > -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3