Re: License

[Aaron Turner <aturner@linuxkb.org>]

Well nobody has replied, and it's been about 48 hours since my post to the
opensource-license list.  It's pretty unusual, because I'm told that
*every* post gets a reply.  Bart thinks the reason why is because the list
is for open source software lics (like the GPL, QPL, OPL, etc) and
documentation/website content falls out of the scope of the list.  This in
itself speaks to me that we shouldn't use the GPL, OPL, or such lics.  If
the open source license list won't talk about our documentation specific
license, or at least suggest we use the OPL/GPL then the OPL isn't
applicable.

I guess I'm still afraid that while the OPL may give us 'political
correctness' it will end up being a legal disaster.  If our goal is to
allow companies to burn our content on a CDROM and sell it or stuff like
that, then we have to make sure the license we use makes sense from a
legal standpoint.  

The LKBOL is 'very generous' in terms of what we allow, I think we should
trust people to realize that.  Sure, some ignorant/lazy people who don't
bother to read the lic will scream, but that's what the FAQ is for.  
Besides, all the smart people who aren't lazy (who are the people who are
actually going to contribute) will see the license as what it really is.  
Nobody complains that you can't copy/distribute Freshmeat.net or
Slashdot.org, so why is someone going to complain that we didn't use the
OPL?

Jason, if you're looking for the text of the NOD, I link to it in the FAQ
or you can just go to http://dmoz.org/license.html

-Aaron

On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Jason Pincin wrote:

> Well,
> 
> I have been unable to find any NOD lic information... but I have read
> our custom lic and the OPL in there entirity about 3 times each...
> 
> They are both good lics... and my mind hasn't changed too much from
> the other night.  I recognize the hard work that went into the cutom
> lic on Aaron's part. It's similar to the NOD vs. OPL.  Aaron's lic is
> better... the OPL will provide better political credibility.
> 
> I would like to wait until we get some sort of response back from the
> group... hopefully sometime today before I state my further opinions.
> 
> Jason
>