Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'd rather go with a similar policy to where we stand with patents. If a > license termination clause isn't being actively enforced, and there's no > good reason to suspect that it will be in future, we should accept it as > free.
The patent non-policy should not be used as a precedent. It's there until the software patent issue goes away in one direction or another -- the current situation is not tenable for the years to come. It's not something anybody should be proud of or enjoy doing, but it's the only way to have *any* software right now. The surrounding situation doesn't seem very similar to that of termination-clause licenses. I've been told that *any* unilateral license can be terminated by the grantor, but I can't easily find citations supporting that. -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
