Subject:
|
Re: Moving the License Forward
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:47:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2727 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Peter Howkins wrote:
> Tim Courtney wrote:
> >
> > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Peter Howkins wrote:
<snip>
>
>
> What, at the risk of banging on forever, in the ShareAlike license
> do you feel is against the stated goals of ldraw.org and the
> sharing attitude of it's contributors? Is there a flaw in the
> ShareAlike license that would force people to stop distributing
> work under it? I personally can't see anything in the ShareAlike license
> that would ever put us in a similar mess to the one currently.
>
> I'm more afraid for the future with a situation where peoples work
> can be relicensed under different terms than I am with a future
> where we are stuck with the ShareAlike license forever.
>
> If we could accept the ShareAlike license as "a good thing", it would
> save a lot of work writing rules to allow people to change it.
Quoting Yoda, "Hard to see, the future is".
The ability to change the ShareAlike license is to hedge our bets against
unforseen issues. If you are omnipotent (should I call you Q?), then you can
see all forseeable issues and can rest in peace. I know that I cannot.
<snip>
> > I disagree that it's a 'cynical method,' though.
>
> Well yeah :)
There is nothing funny about your 'cynical method' reference. We are trying to
fix a problem. Wiser folks than us have told us that creating a bullet proof
license is *much harder* than it appears.
>
> I sort of coming at this from a paranoid, anti bureaucracy, anti
> political point of view. This means I perhaps unfairly place
> motivations on people, in my mind, that they don't actually have.
> My apologies to anyone (particulaly on the SteerCo) that is
> taking this personally.
Thanks, this helps.
>
> I keep on seeing holes in licenses and thinking "Arrrgh, why do
> they need all this power, are they trying to take my rights away".
We are not trying to take your rights away. We are trying to prevent the
handcuffing of future SteerCo's with respect to unforseeable future events.
>
> I hate the idea that after all the work the SteerCo is doing now,
> it would take very little for say five or ten years down the line a
> different SteerCo being able to undo the good work.
I hate the idea that after all the work the SteerCo is doing now, that it would
be impossible for say five or ten years down the line a different Steerco would
be able to make reasonable and neccessary changes to the license.
>
> Maybe if I posted some of my 'Doooom' scenarios, it would help
> others see why I'm a tad worried about this? And fill in
> various holes to prevent them.
Specific doom day scenarios might help, rather than the vague generalizations
you are throwing out now.
Please provide specifics.
>
> Peter
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Moving the License Forward
|
| (...) And yet you appear to be trying to write one, the contributor agreement. Although I don't have any particular experience in writing licenses, I have done a fair bit of work with them, at one point my company required me to read and understand (...) (20 years ago, 15-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Moving the License Forward
|
| (...) I admit my turnout values may have been optimistic :) But I still feel that a greater than 50.00000something percent positive vote ought to be needed to move away from something as good as the ShareAlike license. (...) What, at the risk of (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
139 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
