At 11:01 -0400 2000.09.22, Ben Tilly wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>>
>>At 06:28 AM 9/22/00 -0400, Ben Tilly wrote:
>>> THE ARTISTIC LICENSE
>>> VERSION 2, SEPTEMBER 2000
>>
>>Given how this looks, I'm tempted to put forth the alternative license:
>>
>>"The contents of this archive, except for packages in the ext/ directory
>>explicitly marked otherwise, are placed into the public domain."
>>
>>But I can see how that might not fly... :)
>
>Heh. One of my goals was to find a way to state what I thought
>was the core feeling of the Artistic License in a sound way.
The problem is that the point of having a layperson write it is so that we
can have it in plain English. If we are going to resort to legalese, we
might as well let a lawyer write it, so it actually IS sound.
--
Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pudge.net/
Open Source Development Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://osdn.com/
