Copyrights and GPL

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Sun May 01 2005 - 10:37:57 CDT

On May 1, 2005, at 6:55 AM, JamBoi wrote:
> GPL is "virally free". That is a huge consideration. In order to
> protect it from being "stolen" by anyone I think this style of license
> is required. It totally alters the whole basis whether OVC goes with a
> GPL-type license or one that is more like the OSL.

I've never *heard of* the "Open Software License" before yesterday,
which is a very negative recommendation. I've read dozens of well
known licenses, and pretty well understand the differences among them.
It's true that new ones pop up (literally) every day... I guess OSL is
among them.

But it would take something really extraordinary to make a point for
some new thing over the well known, well tested, approaches in GPL,
BSDL, Public Domain.

> ...likes of the DRE Cartel...

Btw., If you can stop using this silly phrase on the OVC list, that
would do all of us a great service. All the Area 51-ish rhetoric
really just serves to discredit us, and is no help to our efforts.

> they are not including any patented software algorithms or technology

No one has any idea what's patented and what isn't. In fact, if you
were to do research into patents first, that only exposes you/us to
trebled penalties in the event of lawsuit.

But it's true that no one should use "known patent techniques" for OVC
stuff.

_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:08 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT