Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:49:39 -0700 From: Hugues Bruant <hugues@...ofs.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: musl licensing > > And don't get me wrong, I'm probably one of the biggest enemies of > the term "intellectual property" in the open source context; for > companies it's another matter, however, we have to play by the > rules of the system and be clear about what we mean. > For lawyers, calling something "public domain" doesn't mean much > to them. So endure the pain, license it under BSD-0, so Google's > lawyers and future peoples' lawyers are happy and we actually get > shit done. > Or go the SQLite way and charge a fee to get an explicit license for companies that are not comfortable with Public Domain http://sqlite.org/copyright.html That's probably much stronger than the musl community would be comfortable with and also too late as it would require all past contributors to disclaim copyright, not just Rich but it's worth noting that public domain ideology is not incompatible with corporate use. Content of type "text/html" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.