[License-review] [License-discuss] CC0 incompliant with OSD on patents, [was: MXM compared to CC0 ]
tg at mirbsd.de
Sat Mar 10 18:51:46 UTC 2012
Alexander Terekhov dixit:
>> ND isnt Open Source, though.
>Please explain in details what do you mean by proclaiming that "ND
>isnt Open Source",
Oh sorry. No Derivatives. The text you cited was clear on applying
only to unmodified works.
>> Furthermore, think of liabilities.
>Likewise, details, please.
Disclaimers in copyright licences usually exist to reduce them to
a minimum. Whoâs liable for PD stuff? Also, if I want to include a
âPDâ work in another work, which I publish under an OSS licence,
this may be an issue.
âHaving a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
a peeing section in a swimming pool.â
-- Edward Burr
More information about the License-review