Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 12:47:56AM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>> Hrm. Punch cards come to mind. Can't say it should be computer >> readable -- what about OCR? I don't know how this would properly be >> worded. > > A stack of paper is not the preferred form for modification. Leave the > rest for the courts to worry about; trying to specify it can only lead > to misery and pain. Yeah, I think you're right. I take back what I said about making that explicit in the license text. So it seems that GPL + exception for small-scale, non-commercial versions is probably the best bet, along with explanatory text regarding what source means, is the best bet. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
