MOO-cows Mailing List Archive
Re: anyone ever gotten xerox to clarify the MOO licensebefore?
>>>>> "Roger" == Roger Crew <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> It would seem to me that since the MOO code is a derivitive
>> work based on a previous work by Stephen White, aka ghond, that
>> if he were to GPL the original work, then that would solve the
>>> problem for once and for all:
Roger> Keep in mind that the GPL has, to my knowledge, never
Roger> actually been tested in court.
Roger> I don't doubt that Stallman and the FSF lawyers did their
Roger> homework and worked to craft something that has a good
Roger> chance of standing up. However, the fact remains that it's
Roger> a sufficiently radical/novel use of copyright law that
Roger> there's no guarantee that the conditions it imposes are
Roger> enforceable; the wrong judge could easily rule otherwise.
Keep in mind, as you seem to have, that the FSF and the LPF have some
*VERY GOOD* lawyers helping them out with this stuff. They were
instrumental in the Microsoft vs Borland case. I contacted RMS myself
when faced with the case I worked on, and he refered me to the lawyer
that helped in the Borland case. These people are very good indeed at
what they do -- both software and law!
-------- "And there came a writing to him from Elijah" [2Ch 21:12] --------
Robert Jay Brown III email@example.com http://eli.wariat.org 1 847 705-0424
Elijah Laboratories Inc.; 37 South Greenwood Avenue; Palatine, IL 60067-6328
----- M o d e l i n g t h e M e t h o d s o f t h e M i n d ------
Subject Index |