Subject: Re: NetBSD Copyright
To: Greg A. Woods <woods@weird.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>
List: current-users
Date: 03/10/1999 14:12:18
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:15:21 -0500 (EST) 
 woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) wrote:

 > > On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:11:47 -0500 (EST) 
 > >  woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) wrote:
 > > 
 > >  >  * 3. The following acknowledgement must appear in printed documentation
 > >  >  * accompanying a physical distribution of a collective work including
 > >  >  * this software, and must appear in a file accompanying an electronic
 > >  >  * distribution of a collective work including this software:
 > >  >  *
 > >  >  *	This product includes software developed by Greg A. Woods.
 > > 
 > > We've already been around the block with a clause like this before,
 > > and purged all code from the tree that had a clause like this.
 > 
 > Clearly you've not been actually reading many copyright licenses still
 > in the tree!  ;-)

I've read more than I care to remember.  And I've discussed this
issue more times with more individuals than I care to remember.

Clearly you are not understanding the difference between your clause 3
and the TNF/UCB clause 3.  Either that, or you are deliberately
misrepresenting it.

 > However I'm flexible.  I think I'd be willing to change the text of the
 > required acknowledgement to exactly match the TNF text (since I am
 > indeed one of the contributors to TNF), IFF indeed this clause is what's
 > causing the most headache.

Actually, technically, "contributing to TNF" means assigning copyright.

 > IMO the TNF/UCB clause #3 contradicts clause #4, at least in the
 > apparent intent.  That's why I changed the wording and was much more
 > explicit about *my* intent.  Indeed my clause should be even easier for
 > both TNF and subsquent copyright users to adhere to -- it's something
 > that's already being done, seemingly without much hassle (I refer to the
 > listing of acknowledgments in the INSTALL files).

Regardless if your opinion of the TNF/UCB clause 3 vs. clause 4
"contradiction", your clause 3 is unacceptable (IMO, and in the opinion
of TNF, the last time I checked) because it requires attirbution in more
cases than the TNF/UCB license does.  Period.

        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>