FW: Re: License FAQs

 --- On Sat 02/21, Sven Luther < [email protected] > wrote:
From: Sven Luther [mailto: [email protected]]
To: [email protected]
     Cc: [email protected]
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 10:15:44 +0100
Subject: Re: [forum] License FAQs

>Thanks for this, the FAQ is a very nice interpretation of the licence,
>but i wonder how legally binding it is, and what guarantee that this
>interpretation may not change in the future. 

We don't change the legal pages much at all.  It will definitely change 
as more questions get addressed.  A lot of the original questions were removed
as being extraneous to the current situation but perhaps will be added back in
as the 'message' gets out.  As for the interpretation, I think that might, and already has changed, since original publication, received a revision to make things clearer.  As for "the interpretation changing", I cannot see how we can control that; we do not own the dictionary and words are fluid and dynamic and change uncontrollably over time.  I think that will inevitably happen so the interpretation will have to change so that the 'intent' is kept, not the language. 

>AS for myself, i would much
>prefer (from a legalese point of view), that the point 3 be changed to
>be made more understandable and that would need less explaining. I
>believe this is possible, but IANAL.

what's IANAL?  I Am Nothing At Last?  Haven't a clue on that one.  Pass.

I really think point #3 is understandable but perhaps being a native speaker makes the diff?  Don't know as I am not sure that most of the discussion on this topic is because there _was_ a change,  not that the change itself.  To me the discussion is 1) Change is evil, which is great case for progress, eh?   2)You have no right to make a change without telling me so I could say No (the prima donna syndrome, my personal favorite having been trained originally as a Martha Graham dancer).  I don't see that anyone doesn't understand the change, I think they just are all a bunch of reactionaries. I can hardly wait until the FSF 'improves' (code word for change hint hint)
their GPL.  I think we should do something GPL so we can get into the action and partake in the fun.

I say all of this because most of the questions are highly repititive and based on inflamed emotion, and you guys call women the emotional ones?  doesn't look that way from where I'm watching.  I think this shows even nerds want Oprah, Sally Jesse Raphael, Arsenio and the like to get their entertainment.  I guess there is a place for  /.  and x.org after all ;-)

>Will you ship this FAQ together with the licence in the source ? I
>believe that this would be nice, especially as it is not all that big.

Perhaps for the 4.4 release that would make sense.  I think that's a good suggestion but I am not the Release Engineer and again cannot make that call.



_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!