touché Maybe than “licenses that people think they understand" From: Lawrence Rosen <lro...@rosenlaw.com<mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com>> Reply-To: <lro...@rosenlaw.com<mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com>>, <license-discuss@opensource.org<mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org>> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 08:33:10 -0700 To: <license-discuss@opensource.org<mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org>> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] FAQ entry (and potential website page?) on "why standard licenses"?
Philip Odence suggested: > Hey maybe “well-understood” is a good alternative to “standard." Note that the GPL is one of the "least-understood" licenses around, even by some of its supporters who make the most outrageous claims about linking. :-) /Larry From: Philip Odence [mailto:pode...@blackducksoftware.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 4:52 AM To: lro...@rosenlaw.com<mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com>; license-discuss@opensource.org<mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] FAQ entry (and potential website page?) on "why standard licenses"? <snip> _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org<mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
