W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2011

Re: Option 3

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:35:51 -0400
Message-ID: <4D8A2167.3000402@intertwingly.net>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, mjs@apple.com, lrosen@rosenlaw.com, public-html@w3.org, member-psig@w3.org
On 03/23/2011 09:03 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 3/23/11 8:18 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> The current position of the Mozilla Foundation[1] allows "MIT, BSD, and
>> similar permissive licenses".
>
> Yes, that's the guideline (think of it as an informative statement in a
> spec). The "normative" requirement, for any license not already in use
> in our code, is to have licensing at mozilla.org examine it and decide
> whether it's "permissive" per the above.

Would it be possible to get licensing at mozilla.org to examine this 
license?  I ask as I am unaware of MIT or BSD meeting the criteria that 
Jonas suggests[1], and would expect that Mozilla would apply consistent 
reasoning in this case.  Getting an explicit ruling (either way, it 
matters not) would be most helpful.

> -Boris

- Sam Ruby

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0524.html
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 16:36:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:26 GMT