[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: [knghtbrd@debian.org: QPL v0.92+knghtbrd1]
From:       Joseph Carter <knghtbrd () debian ! org>
Date:       1998-12-29 5:38:54
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, Dec 28, 1998 at 11:03:22PM +0000, Andreas Pour wrote:
> I have briefly looked at the latest draft, and that totally convinces me
> that Troll Tech needs a copyright lawyer to draft its license.  Especially
> Section 7 is bizarre and impossible as drafted.  Anyway, I attach some
> comments in a file (b/c it's in html) which hopefully provides lots of
> clarifications, as the document is pretty darn ambiguous as drafted.
> Deletions from the draft are underlined, additions are emboldened.

A Copyright lawyer would be nice.  We don't exactly have one offering to
do it free of charge however and I don't think I have done all that bad a
job considering that I'm not a Copyright lawyer.  The only person
involved with this discussion who is even in a position to really consult
a Copyright lawyer is RMS, and you removed him from your reply so unless
someone forwards the message to him, he'll never see it.  (Not to mention
my belief that RMS is likely not going to be viewed by anyone at Troll
Tech as taking their professional product and profitability into account,
whether he did or not)

As you commented, a good portion of section 7 has no legal purpose.  The
purpose was not intended to be legal, it was intended to be there for
people who AREN'T lawyers to read and understand the intent of the line
above, which could serve a rewrite based on your comments.  Your solution
of just delete the whole thing doesn't much help things.

-- 
NO ONE expects the Spanish Inquisition!

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]