From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id DAA13345; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 03:33:32 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA13443 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 03:33:31 +0100 (MET) Received: from epexch01.qlogic.org ([63.170.40.3]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h1O2XTT18759 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 03:33:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from epmailtmp.qlogic.org ([10.20.33.254]) by epexch01.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:35:30 -0600 Received: from [10.20.33.146] ([10.20.33.146]) by epmailtmp.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:35:30 -0600 Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:43:30 -0600 (CST) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: Reply-To: Brian Hurt To: Nicolas Cannasse cc: Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer , Sven Luther , Subject: Re: [Caml-list] User library license In-Reply-To: <00d501c2dba6$6c2085c0$1c13f9ca@Warp2> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2003 02:35:30.0616 (UTC) FILETIME=[65F4C380:01C2DBAD] Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Nicolas Cannasse wrote: > And what about a "do anything you want with it, including compiling, > modifiying, inserting bugs" license ? A) This would require relicensing the code when/if it gets included in the standard library. Which means tracking down every single contributor and getting their permission to relicense their work (probably needing a signed and witnessed peice of paper). B) If you have identified some shortcomming in the libraries, the probability is that other people have as well, and could benefit from your code. C) I don't want 50 different proprietary versions of the library running around. The original unix schism occurred because people (and companies) took the source code, made changes to it, and didn't release the changes. Which meant you ended up with 50 different, incompatible, extensions to address the same problem. D) A personal reason: I'm a paid programmer. Occassionally I accept payment in kind- which is what I view the GPL (and LGPL) as. I, for one, would be disinclined to license my code under a BSD or Public Domain style license. > I mean, this kind of collaborative work shouldn't even be (c) > (although it's fair to maintain a list of contributors somewhere in the > distribution) There is a theory in IP law circles that the *only* way a copyrightable work can become public domain is for the copyright to expire. And that simply distributing the work without a license doesn't mean that a license (with arbitrary terms) could be imposed at a later point. Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners