Re: Licences

Noel Welsh <noelwelsh-/[email protected]> writes at 04:19 23-Aug-2004 -0700:
> I believe what we want the licence to say (informally) is:

Sounds good to me.  Although we might need a lawyer to look it over,
if it's to have much force without not painting ourselves into a corner.

For example, talk of permission from SchematicsEditorsGroup begs the
questions of:

1. As an external matter, what constitutes permission from the set of
   individuals that constitutes SchematicsEditorsGroup?  (A verbal OK
   from one person?  Declaration on lambskin, signed in blood
   unanimously by all persons named on the Web page?)

2. As an internal matter to SchematicsEditorsGroup, if a collective
   decision must be made to constitute "permission", *how* is the
   decision is made?

If we can cover this kind of bases ourselves, without a lawyer, that's
great.  I do think they need to be covered.  And, not being a lawyer
myself, I'm not confident that I can identify all the necessary bases.

-- 
                                             http://www.neilvandyke.org/


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media
100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33
Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift.
http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285