Subject:
|
Re: Parts license
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:16:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1323 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev, Jacob Sparre Andersen writes:
> > > Steve:
> >
> > > > 5. If ldraw.org permanently ceases to publish or distribute the Library, all
> > > > licenses to the works contained in the library will be revoked.
> > >
> > > I have a strong dislike for revokable licenses. I think
> > > this paragraph should be dropped.
> >
> > I suggested a reword for it. However I'm not sure your likes and dislikes are
> > germane. The intent of this paragraph is to ensure that if LDraw.org should
> > cease to exist, it is clear what should happen. That is, that the rights
> > should revert and no successor org has rights without reacquiring them.
Like Larry said, I included item II.5 in order to deal with the case of
ldraw.org. I understand how Jacob feels about revokable licenses, but I'm
OK with this idea, because ldraw.org is the party which is terminating the
license. Maybe it would be better to just state, "ldraw.org may terminate
the license at any time".
I don't particularly like the idea of the LCAD Library 'evaporating',
because the licenses to each of the contributed works have lapsed. But
existing licenses to use and redistribute the library would continue to
exist, so someone else could still set up a system to maintain and further
the library -- they'd just have to change the name.
> Oh, one other thing I just thought of. IS this what we want to have happen? Or
> does the "defunct" Ldraw.org need to "retain" rights in order to preserve
> them? I dunno.
I dunno either. Another problem of a non-organized organization. If we
don't exist, we can't dissolve, or reform.
> Also, we need to check to make sure that using non-exclusive is sufficient,
> that is, do we have a position on other organizations that may come into
> existance, or on what else parts authors can do with their parts? I'm thinking
> we should not try to prevent either.
I agree.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) Oh, one other thing I just thought of. IS this what we want to have happen? Or does the "defunct" Ldraw.org need to "retain" rights in order to preserve them? I dunno. Also, we need to check to make sure that using non-exclusive is sufficient, (...) (24 years ago, 22-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
