Bruce Perens scripsit: > They would only be different if the organization became politically > capable to dis-recommend licenses.
Quite so. I see no sign of that happening. OSI, unlike FSF, has always been seen as a neutral fact-finder. > I think my favorite is probably still the SIL font license, where it > says "The requirement for fonts to remain under this license does not > apply to any document created using the Font Software." As far as I can > tell, that allows you to convert a font to any license or no license, > and then extract it again, and the SIL license doesn't magically come > back. Fonts are not documents. What's meant is that the license doesn't apply to a document created using the font. Even if you put a full type specimen into a document and then extracted the characters from it, you'd wind up with a font again and the SIL would apply. -- John Cowan co...@ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan Sound change operates regularly to produce irregularities; analogy operates irregularly to produce regularities. --E.H. Sturtevant, ca. 1945, probably at Yale _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss