How can we not adopt some manner of "open source" attitude, Paul? That
has been the basic methodology of the IETF for some time. Otherwise, we
would be paying for every DNS lookup.
Scott
On 15 Oct 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
> esr@xxxxxxxxxxx ("Eric S. Raymond") writes:
>
> > ...
> > The open-source community figured out by about 1997-1998 that there is no
> > way to discriminate between "commercial" and "noncommercial" activity
> > that does not create fatal uncertainties about who has what rights at
> > what times. When you add the problems of mixing software with licenses
> > having *different versions* of such a distinction the downside gets even
> > worse.
> >
> > Thus, the licensing guidelines of both the OSI and FSF forbid attempts at
> > this.
>
> This only matters if you intend to limit redistribution. The older BSD
> licenseware limits only liability, not redistribution, and thus doesn't
> care about details like commerce. This could be a lesson for IETF if we
> really are going to address IPR issues in the boilerplate by adopting any
> kind of "open source" attitude.
> --
> Paul Vixie
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
sleekfreak pirate broadcast
http://sleekfreak.ath.cx:81/
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf