I'll try to search for an appropriate license and e-mail it to you.  I've been 
searching though a little bit of licensing info and really didn't know that 
even declaring that something is "public domain" doesn't necessarily mean what 
you think it means.  I suspect it may ultimately have something to do with the 
lawyers needing SOMEBODY to go after when something goes wrong -- declaring it 
to be public domain doesn't necessarily get you completely "off the hook".  I 
know Jim has a significant concern over these kinds of things since he is the 
"face" of FreeDOS.

We could end up having a long discussion about this (and it might even be 
worthwhile, or at least entertaining), but it seems to me as though legally 
they try to classify software as simply another "branch" of writing, with the 
other major branches being books and music.  While they all certainly have 
"creative" aspects to them and can be "plagiarized" in some sense, they really 
are different animals and pretending they are the same (even if only in a legal 
sense) really doesn't seem very logical.  Of course, legality and logic don't 
necessarily need to have anything to do with each other.

For example, I know it's a big deal these days for musicians to claim that 
somebody who disagrees with their politics can't play their songs (at things 
like political rallies).  Basically, they're declaring who can and can't listen 
to their music.  This would be equivalent to book-banning by an author -- the 
author of a book saying who can and can't read it, or a programmer declaring 
who can't and can't use their software (even if they pay for it).

We're living in a funny world.


_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Reply via email to