Subject: Re: "University-style" vs "Berkeley" licenses
From: Ray Jones <rjones@pobox.com>
Date: 27 Aug 1998 03:50:29 +0000

shap@eros.cis.upenn.edu writes:

> *One* party concluded that a *portion* of the copyright concerning
> advertising was unenforcable and chose to ignore it *after* seeking
> advice of counsel.
>
> [...]
>
> Both proper initial wording of the agreement and enforcement of the
> terms are the responsibility of the licensor.  Caveat Emptor.

i am not concerned with the legal arguments regarding enforcability of
BSD-style licenses.  my statements were judgements based on my own
moral views, which are not based on laws.  i think it is morally wrong
to violate an author's wishes regarding the use of their work with
only a profit-motive as justification.

arguments from a more 'information freedom' POV (violate IP "rights"
as a form of civil disobedience) would engender less scorn on my part.
however, ignoring the licenses of open source works rather than, for
instance, microsoft, strikes me as attacking those you should be
allying with (...if that were your POV).

ray jones