develooper Front page | perl.artistic2 | Postings from June 2006

Re: Artistic License 2.0 RC1

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
mock
Date:
June 2, 2006 00:34
Subject:
Re: Artistic License 2.0 RC1
Message ID:
20060602073339.GR20098@obscurity.org
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 11:38:10PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
> The first release candidate for the Artistic License 2.0 and the 
> Contributor License Agreement are now up for review on 
> <http://perlfoundation.org/legal/>. Thanks to all who contributed 
> questions and suggestions.
> 
> Allison

What's the diff from the last version?

I think the following questions need to be clearly answered and put into the
faq:

Can I re-license a modified version under the GPL v2? Why?

- If I can, then OpenBSD will likely do so, and offer perl under those terms.

Can I re-license a modified version under the Artistic v1 license? Why?

- Unless they can do this, in which case they probably will.
- From talking to Theo, OpenBSD will probably never ship with code with a
  patent provision (Apache2 is not even in the ports tree).  This is personally
  a big pain in the ass, so I'm hoping one of the two above is true.

Can I include code from a GPL v2 project? Why?

- This sucks if provision 13 prevents me from linking to GPL v2 libraries
  as there are many of them that are very useful, and unlikely to change 
  license.  It would be nice if the FSF could answer this question, as they
  are pretty much the authoritative source of info on what is compatible with
  the GPL.

Can I include code from an Artistic v1 licensed project? Why?

- Obviously if I can't do this makes using old perl bits harder unless the 
  author can be tracked down and convinced to relicense.  I'm pretty sure this
  is obviously yes, but it would be good to have that stated in the faq, so I
  can point lawyers/bosses/clients to it.

What is the status of code that was distributed by someone who has lost their
license under provision 13?  Example: If I received a modified perl from SCO
under the Artistic v2 license, am I allowed to distribute that code if SCO
later files patent litigation, losing their license (assuming that I am 
otherwise in compliance myself)?  Why?

- This has the potential to taint the work of people down the chain of
  distribution, causing all sorts of mess.

mock

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About