Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I note with some sadness the more restrictive license that may be placed > on the "Haskell 98 Report", as reported by the HC&A.
I have a hard time imagining what this actually means. The report, as it is licensed now allows for: > I have just grabbed a copy of the latest revised report under the > current licence. AIUI I can continue to publish this under the current > licence and [..] incorporate any fixes etc So what exactly is it they want copyright to? Obviously, they can have the copyright to the *book* and it's layout and such (i.e., one cannot xerox it), but the contents is already in the free, isn't it? > assuming I change the name, Do they get to own the name? > I would really prefer it if such forking wasn't necessary I'm not sure it would be forking, unless somebody plans on maintaining CUP's "official" version for them. > I must admit to not seeing what CUP would be getting > out of it if this is so, though. Exactly. They can't really get an exclusive copyright to a document that's free, can they? Some publishers are mostly worried about having the right to do what they will, rather than restricting others. I think at any rate it's important to be up front with CUP with this, so they know what's going to happen, so that they don't feel cheated or mislead. <strong opinion> I'd love to have it in book form, but it's much more important to have it freely available (e.g. in Debian). </> -kzm -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
