[Python-Dev] License cleanup
Tue, 14 Sep 1999 17:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Hm... We may have to review the regulation of the Python name. This
> made sense in the context of the previous uses of this license
> (JPython and Grail) but Python is a different thing -- the name Python
> stands for more than just the implementation. I'll discuss this with
> CNRI's legal team.
> I don't see how the other things you mention can be much of a problem
> (most Open Source licenses have a revocation clause these days, I
> think, and I don't see how discussing the modifications made can be a
> problem with open source users).
I'll do some more reading. As I said: that was my first cut. The
revocation clause doesn't sit well with me. Maybe other OSS packages have
it, but I believe that is usually because the license was developed by a
company and its legal team. I don't think the GPL, BSD, MPL, and Apache
licenses have revocation clauses, and I consider those to be the "most
open" types of licenses (MPL less so). The Python 1.5 license is just as
open, more so than most.
> > Heck, how could people like PPSI, PythonWare, or D.C. truely like that
> > license? Each of those companies uses "Python" significantly in their
> > marketing and their business. I can certainly state that PPSI will never
> > do anything in an official capacity to recognize that license.
> How can you say that without consulting with the board? And I am *on*
> that board! I despise your attitude.
Because the President (me) runs the day-to-day operation and direction of
the company. The Board advises. The Board typically has other duties such
as replacing me :-), handling stock issues, etc, but the Board is
typically not involved with most issues. This is standard practice for
Therefore, I *can* make that choice, and even do it unilaterally if I
wanted to be an ass about it. Will I refuse to listen to the board or the
shareholders or the employees? Of course I'll listen.
[further PPSI issues should be taken offline]
Regardless: it boils down to the "Python" requirement in that license.
PPSI simply cannot operate under that license. If it gets dropped, then
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/