- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:43:57 -0500
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, site-policy@w3.org
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > [snip] > > it fails. It does not work for LGPL software and it does not really work > for MIT-licensed software. > [snip] > > I was trying to start on stating which of our original use cases it does > not meet. Perhaps that is better done by starting with the original list > of use cases, and see which we feel are satisfied and which are not. If we start with this: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0388.html And strike all the use cases that involve MIT-licensed software. And then strike all the use cases that involve LGPL software. And then strike all the use cases that involve forking, what are you left with? Go ahead, take a look, I won't spoil the surprise. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but if (for example) Eben Moglen were to publicly say that this Draft W3C Excerpt License was both MIT and LGPL compatible then I'd be inclined to defer to him on this. I'd even be willing to give a little on the license proliferation point. But that hasn't happened. All we have is a Draft which appears to satisfy few, if any, of the original use cases. - Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 23:44:41 UTC