"Michael T. Babcock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Paul Jarc wrote:
> > A license has the potential to be just as ill-worded, confusing, or
> > extremely technical as anything else. A clearly worded, easily
> > supportable legal document would be good, regardless of whether it
> > were a license.
>
> As DJB has said ... 'so?'
So if you want a clear, legally binding statement of your rights, ask
for a clear, legally binding statement of your rights, not a license.
A license will satisfy a request for a license, but need not satisfy
those making the request if they actually wanted something else.
> > Right. So a non-contractual license wouldn't necessarily be better
> > than a non-contractual, non-license legal statement.
>
> Yes, it would be -- because (as I understand it) you have the right
> to waive your rights -- such as by putting something into the public
> domain (as Dan has done with libtai).
Yes, and that's an example of a non-contractual, non-license legal
statement that gives you clear rights, and so isn't any worse than a
license.
paul
