[Axiom-legal] Licensing Aldor (was: GPL vs. modified BSD)

[Bill Page]

I think Tim's comments about licensing are "right on".

So in this light, how should we view the current situation with
Aldor? Last March I proposed that we (or I) simply go ahead and
license Aldor source as GPL (or under the Aldor Public License).
The benefits for Axiom are obvious and I can see not negative
affects on Aldor and the people who current depend on it via
aldor.org. At the time Mike Dewar convinced me to "wait until"
summer with the promise that it would be discussed when he met
Steven Watt at one of several meetings. He also said that NAG
"would likely approve any reasonable proposal". Again in August
we heard that it had been discussed. But there has been no news
of any kind sense then.

Do you think I should resurrect my plan to just unilaterally
release Aldor as open source and see what happens?

Regards,
Bill Page.

On November 20, 2006 7:52 AM Tim Daly wrote:
> 
> > > > Just curious: What _exactly_ would forbid to distribute 
> > > > Axiom under GPL?
> > > 
> > > Nothing. 
> > > 
> > > The Modified BSD allows anyone to do this.
> > 
> > On the other hand the side-effect would likely be a fork in 
> > the axiom project. I've seen discussions for and against going
> > GPL. I argued for GPL before axiom was released but accepted
> > the MBSD as a reasonable license.
> > 
> > Consider that the real point of licensing is that you can sue
> > people who violate the license and that the point of bringing
> > suit is to get money (ask any lawyer... I have) you'll see that
> > axiom's license is uninteresting. Any lawyer worth his $250/hour
> > will tell you that you don't sue people "on principle". Such
> > suits are considered "harassing" and are generally thrown out.
> > Threatening to bring such suits without actually following up
> > is called barristry and is grounds for being sued.
> > ... 
> > A suit against an open software project for mixing GPL and MBSD
> > code is unlikely to cause "actual damages" and since you are not
> > directly impacted financially you're unlikely to have "standing".
> > Further since the MBSD requires you to hold NAG free from
> > responsibility you can't sue them. And since no-one owns axiom
> > (I certainly don't) there isn't an organization to sue and there
> > can be no monetary gain. No lawyer is going to take the case and
> > no judge is going to hear the case.
> > ...