# anyone ever gotten xerox to clarify the MOO licensebefore?

"Robert J. Brown" (rj@eli.wariat.org)
Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:57:36 PST

- Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

    >>>>> "Roger" == Roger Crew <rfc@microsoft.com> writes:

        >> It would seem to me that since the MOO code is a derivitive
        >> work based on a previous work by Stephen White, aka ghond, that
        >> if he were to GPL the original work, then that would solve the
        >> whole
        >>> problem for once and for all:

        Roger> Keep in mind that the GPL has, to my knowledge, never
        Roger> actually been tested in court.

        Roger> I don't doubt that Stallman and the FSF lawyers did their
        Roger> homework and worked to craft something that has a good
        Roger> chance of standing up.  However, the fact remains that it's
        Roger> a sufficiently radical/novel use of copyright law that
        Roger> there's no guarantee that the conditions it imposes are
        Roger> enforceable; the wrong judge could easily rule otherwise.

    Keep in mind, as you seem to have, that the FSF and the LPF have some
    *VERY GOOD* lawyers helping them out with this stuff.  They were
    instrumental in the Microsoft vs Borland case.  I contacted RMS myself
    when faced with the case I worked on, and he refered me to the lawyer
    that helped in the Borland case.  These people are very good indeed at
    what they do -- both software and law!

    --
    --------  "And there came a writing to him from Elijah"  [2Ch 21:12]  --------
    Robert Jay Brown III  rj@eli.wariat.org  http://eli.wariat.org  1 847 705-0424
    Elijah Laboratories Inc.;  37 South Greenwood Avenue;  Palatine, IL 60067-6328
    -----  M o d e l i n g   t h e   M e t h o d s   o f   t h e   M i n d  ------