Subject: RE: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 01:00:29 -0800

 Wed, 6 Nov 2002 01:00:29 -0800
> From: Mike Nordell [] 
> >From my wording, I think it's quite obvious that IANAL.
> [link to OSL 1.1]
> I must say, I read just down to 1 b) before I got hickups.
> "to prepare"... What is prepare? To fork a CVS copy in 
> preparation for some "real work"? To... I don't know.

The word "prepare" is taken from 17 U.S.C. 106, which reserves to the
author of a copyrighted work the exclusive right "to prepare derivative
works based upon the copyrighted work."  If the word is good enough for
the U.S. Copyright Act, its good enough for me.

> I also have complaints about the 100% reduncance in 
> explaining that "derivative works" is  really  "('Derivative 
> Works')". 

That is to ensure that the term "derivative works" is used precisely the
same in this license as it is used in 17 U.S.C. 106 and as it is
defined in 17 U.S.C. 101.  

If you don't like those words and those definitions, take it up with the


license-discuss archive is at