Subject:
|
Re: Parts license
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:36:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1230 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> 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.
Are you OK with this, with the intent that if ldraw.org decides to stop
publishing, it will be giving up the licenses granted to it by the
contributors?
> > 4. If a contribution is rejected, ldraw.org has no further right to that file
> > or its contents.
>
> "... no further right to that contribution."
Right.
> > 6. The contributor grants ldraw.org a non-exclusive, unrevokable license to
> > the work.
>
> "... license to distribute the work according to this license."
Right, with Larry's modification.
> > 9. Ldraw.org will publish the Library as a free (insert gnu-reference)
> > resource, granting users the rights necessary to use and improve the library.
>
> ?
Sorry, sloppy short-hand. "free (insert gnu-reference)" was my way of
saying that I was using the term 'free' in terms of 'free software', not
'no charge'.
> > 7. No fee may be charged for redistributing the Library, except for a small
> > charge to cover the cost of redistribution.
>
> Why? I don't think this is necessary.
I agree, but I think most people will want it.
> > 11. If a redistribution allows users direct access to the files contained in
> > the Library, then the republisher must grant users of the redistributed
> > Library the same rights granted to in this User Agreement.
>
> Why not just "11. A republisher must grant users of the
> redistributed Library the same rights as granted in this
> User Agreement."?
See Larry's reply. But it would probably be easier/clearer to state:
. 11. If the Library is redistributed without modification,
. then the republisher must grant users of the redistributed Library
. the same rights granted in this User Agreement.
But there's probably a better way to say that last line.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Parts license
|
| Steve: (...) [...] Ok. (...) So far ok. (...) I have a strong dislike for revokable licenses. I think this paragraph should be dropped. (...) Ok. (...) "... no further right to that contribution." (...) Ok. (...) "... license to distribute the work (...) (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
|
|
|
|
