Subject: Re: NetBSD Copyright
To: Greg A. Woods <woods@weird.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>
List: current-users
Date: 03/10/1999 14:12:18
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:15:21 -0500 (EST)
woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:11:47 -0500 (EST)
> > woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) wrote:
> >
> > > * 3. The following acknowledgement must appear in printed documentation
> > > * accompanying a physical distribution of a collective work including
> > > * this software, and must appear in a file accompanying an electronic
> > > * distribution of a collective work including this software:
> > > *
> > > * This product includes software developed by Greg A. Woods.
> >
> > We've already been around the block with a clause like this before,
> > and purged all code from the tree that had a clause like this.
>
> Clearly you've not been actually reading many copyright licenses still
> in the tree! ;-)
I've read more than I care to remember. And I've discussed this
issue more times with more individuals than I care to remember.
Clearly you are not understanding the difference between your clause 3
and the TNF/UCB clause 3. Either that, or you are deliberately
misrepresenting it.
> However I'm flexible. I think I'd be willing to change the text of the
> required acknowledgement to exactly match the TNF text (since I am
> indeed one of the contributors to TNF), IFF indeed this clause is what's
> causing the most headache.
Actually, technically, "contributing to TNF" means assigning copyright.
> IMO the TNF/UCB clause #3 contradicts clause #4, at least in the
> apparent intent. That's why I changed the wording and was much more
> explicit about *my* intent. Indeed my clause should be even easier for
> both TNF and subsquent copyright users to adhere to -- it's something
> that's already being done, seemingly without much hassle (I refer to the
> listing of acknowledgments in the INSTALL files).
Regardless if your opinion of the TNF/UCB clause 3 vs. clause 4
"contradiction", your clause 3 is unacceptable (IMO, and in the opinion
of TNF, the last time I checked) because it requires attirbution in more
cases than the TNF/UCB license does. Period.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>