Re: [License-discuss] MIT License with mandatory arbitration?

2021-11-16 Thread McCoy Smith
RPL 1.5, which is OSI approved, has an arbitration clause (which is required to be in Adams County, Colorado -- which for everyone who isn't from Colorado, is the northeastern suburbs of Denver, including the airport) https://opensource.org/licenses/RPL-1.5 Old Mozilla did too: https://opensource.o

Re: [License-discuss] MIT license difference between X.org, SPDX and OSI

2021-07-01 Thread Sebastian Crane
Dear Keith, I came across your email whilst browsing the archives for this mailing list. Hopefully this message might still be useful to you despite the somewhat delayed response! :) On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 05:09:14PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > We were happily reviewing a licensing update in s

Re: [License-discuss] MIT License

2020-04-08 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Ashkar Dev dixit: >can you explain the point that says to include the license of used code, >but can it be included inside the file but not directly with copied code? Not sure I understand you directly, but: If you redistribute some MIT-licenced work which has documentation, and the documentatio