Subject: Re: For Approval: Open Source Software Alliance License
From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 02:29:58 -0400

Sean Chittenden scripsit:

> > Your license is fine, once the ambiguities are squeezed out, and I
> > recommend that the OSI approve it.
> 
> Are you apart of the approval process?  *doesn't remember reading that
> part*

As an individual, no; as a member of this list, yes.

> Well, from what I can tell, any conclusion that isn't the GPL seems to
> indicate a flaw in whoever's argumentation.  :)  -sc

It so happens that my latest piece of free software was issued
under the Academic Free License.  I wound up dual-licensing it
under the GPL because the AFL's patent poison-pill is GPL-incompatible.

-- 
"You're a brave man! Go and break through the           John Cowan
lines, and remember while you're out there              jcowan@reutershealth.com
risking life and limb through shot and shell,           www.ccil.org/~cowan
we'll be in here thinking what a sucker you are!"       www.reutershealth.com
        --Rufus T. Firefly
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3