On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:50:37 -0500 (EST) 
 woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) wrote:

 > > Actually, technically, "contributing to TNF" means assigning copyright.
 > 
 > That's a technicality I won't get into....

Regardless of if you wish to discuss it or not, that is, in fact, the case.

Actually, let me clarify that a little... contributing _CODE_ to TNF means
assigning copyright of that code to TNF.  It's the same way w/ the FSF.

 > 
 > >  > ....  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.
 > 
 > Technically speaking you're not only wrong about the difference between
 > my terms and those of the UCB-style copyright license, but you've got it
 > completely backwards -- at least if you compare it to the *intent*
 > behind my terms and perhaps not the specific wording of them (that's
 > what this discussion is all about -- how to make the words match the
 > intent in a way that will hopefully be acceptable to a court of law).

The _INTENT_ you have of forcing people to mention you in the install
notes, regardless if they mention your LM78 driver, is one of the things
I'm objecting to!

Let's pretend I'm a router vendor, and I happen to be using NetBSD/i386
on a machine that happens to have an LM78 to monitor CPU temperature, and
I happen to be using those facilities in my router product.  You're saying
I have to mention you in my router's install guide or other accompanying
documentation.

As a vendor, I don't want to do that.

So, as a vendor, I'd either choose some other OS, or, if I were committed to
using NetBSD, rewrite the LM78 driver, and, since I'm a vendor with a good
concience :-), contribute the code back to NetBSD (i.e. assign copyright
to TNF).

 > acknowledgement in "All advertising materials mentioning features or use
 > of this software [...]."
 > 
 > Clearly this requires attribution in more cases than *my* license does
 > -- i.e. the opposite of what you claim above.

No, you are wrong.  "...advertising materials mentioning features or use..."

If I never mention your LM78 driver, I never have to mention you.  That is
the key difference.

 > Technically speaking my new clause #4 is also intended to *prohibit* all
 > present and future users of the NetBSD distribution from mentioning my
 > name in any *promotional* materials.  (Which is essentially very similar
 > to the UCB clause #4.)  [[I'm not willing to allow anyone who has money

One interpretation is that the UCB clause 3 is explicit, specific permission
to use the organization's name for THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE of fulfilling the
obligation outlined in clause 3.

 > I.e. if my proposed clause #3 is unacceptable then it would only stand
 > to reason that all similar clauses in the dozens of different copyrights
 > already in use in the distribution are doubly more unacceptable.  Stop
 > the presses!!!  Hold the release!!!  Call the Lawyers!!!!  ;-)

Actually, before I resigned from Core, there were some dicussions about
how we were going to pursue getting as many copyrights as possible
assigned to TNF... but I don't know what the status of that is right now.

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