On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> I object to this. And it did not say WILL be royalty-free it said
..
> I object to that as well.
..
> I would like to petition the board for such a statement.
Folks,
Could you toss the board a bone here - i.e. reach consensus what *we* as
developers (all of us :-) feel are acceptable boundaries for working on
that code.
Then the board will help define what the ASF deems acceptable, and work
with you to convey this to RSA and/or negotiate the right sort of legal
paperwork with RSA.
Some thoughds:
- Zero Royalty versus (perpetual) Royalty Free ? Or a perpatual
license with Zero Royalty today.
- Does it affect just ASF Developers or also the End-Users or people
who download our code ?
- Does it affect individual developers or can the ASF act as an
effective umbrella for all its committers ?
Obviously - the spirit of the ASF license are our main guideline; we'd
like our code to be as unencumbered for others to work on. But at the same
time we have the frameworks to work with people like SUN or RSA if needed
to ensure that things like the nessesary patent licenses are obtained.
Dw
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
