bobef wrote:
> jcc7 Wrote:
> 
>> By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic license.
> 
> From my point of view it is already dead. I posted it just because it have some good stuff in there that may be useful to someone. About you flies question - yes, I am pretty sure flies are sentient beings, but if there are few lines of my code on the page and few lines of your code then which code is the reason? Another question - is the code the reason for your friend to kill the fly or the paper, or maybe the reason is in your friend? Is there reason at all? Guys, lets skip the crap. If you find the code useful - use it for good. Or don't. I don't care really. Just don't use it to make a flies exterminating piece software or library with license that allows it to be used in flies exterminating software.

I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce ethical behaviour is not the right approach...
Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like:
"the author requests that ..."
and put it under a standard license.

Don Clugston Wrote:

> 
> I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce ethical
> behaviour is not the right approach...
> Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like:
> "the author requests that ..."
> and put it under a standard license.

I see no lawyers in the whole thing. Looking at my English dictionary I understand the word "license" as "the author requests that ...". I haven't mentioned lawyers, have I? If you think of how this legal nonsense (because the state it is today is real madness in my opinion) begun it was just that. People *agreed* to follow some common rules. Today nobody agrees anything. Everybody is just forced, assuming that he agreed to be forced... Anyway... If it sounds "legal" to you-  fine.

"I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used in a way that will result harm to anyone or anything sentient"

Don Clugston, el  5 de junio a las 09:15 me escribiste:
> bobef wrote:
> >jcc7 Wrote:
> >>By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic license.
> >From my point of view it is already dead. I posted it just because it have some good stuff in there that may be useful to someone. About you flies question - yes, I am pretty sure flies are sentient beings, but if there are few lines of my code on the page and few lines of your code then which code is the reason? Another question - is the code the reason for your friend to kill the fly or the paper, or maybe the reason is in your friend? Is there reason at all? Guys, lets skip the crap. If you find the code useful - use it for good. Or don't. I don't care really. Just don't use it to make a flies exterminating piece software or library with license that allows it to be used in flies exterminating software.
> 
> I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce ethical behaviour is not the right approach...
> Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like:
> "the author requests that ..."
> and put it under a standard license.

Maybe he should try (and modify/extend?) BOLA[1] =)

[1] http://auriga.wearlab.de/~alb/bola/

-- 
LUCA - Leandro Lucarella - Usando Debian GNU/Linux Sid - GNU Generation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail / JID:     luca@lugmen.org.ar
GPG Fingerprint:  D9E1 4545 0F4B 7928 E82C  375D 4B02 0FE0 B08B 4FB2
GPG Key:          gpg --keyserver pks.lugmen.org.ar --recv-keys B08B4FB2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Si ella es el sol, yo soy la luna
Si ella es el mar, soy el desierto
Y estamos en eclipse total
Y estamos en eclipse total

Op Mon, 04 Jun 2007 21:11:45 -0700
schreef Gregor Richards <Richards@codu.org>:

> Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>
> 
> Permission is not granted, and is explicitly disallowed, regardless of fees or charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to use it in any manner, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software.

A shorter version of that is: "".   ;-)


-- 
Jan Claeys

"bobef" <ads@aad.asd> wrote in message news:f40auh$pfk$1@digitalmars.com...
> http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower.zip
> http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower_older.zip
> http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/thirdparty.zip

Uh, the homepage of that site has gone down.

http://www.flowerplatform.com/

Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

Stewart. 

bobef wrote:
> "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not
> used in a way that will result harm to anyone or anything sentient"

:-)

I'd love to see a lawyer have you or the opposition define sentient.

It's such a shame that things perfectly clear to us, can and will be picked up, wrigled beyond recongition, hashed and shaken, and then fed to ourselves from the rear.

No wonder many intelligent people find the innards of a computer the only sane and safe place on earth.

Not to mention, I've actually met a couple of persons who really seem to think they are the only living entity sentient. Having them in the courtroom in this case makes for a Broadway play, anytime.

Gregor Richards wrote:
> bobef wrote:
>> Gregor Richards Wrote:
>>
>>> Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly nonsensical.
>>>
>>> If I modify your code, and then give it to a friend of mine, and they modify it, and then they give it to somebody else, and then their third cousin twice removed borrows their computer and sends the code to their great-grand-niece's lesbian life partner's dog's groomer's husband, and he works for NASA and decides to give it to his astronaut friend who runs it while in space, and it hangs and causes the life support systems to fail temporarily, which makes somebody's breathing a bit awkward for a minute, I've just violated your license while not even touching your software. 
>>
>> If you think this is going to be the case, don't give it to your friend. As simple as that ;)
> 
> Wow, way to make an "open" license that's not open in the least, and then defend it with a smug, meaningless sentence.
> 
> "If you think this is going to be the case" means "unless you are psychic", because nobody can truly predict what is going to be done with something they give to a friend. No license which requires its users to be psychic ... hell, no such license even makes any effing sense.
> 
>  - Gregor Richards

Seems like someone missed the point of licenses here. :\
(Apart from looking uber cool in a source file, that is.)

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Not to mention, I've actually met a couple of persons who really seem to think they are the only living entity sentient.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

Unconditional solipsists really exist? I'm enough of a philosopher to accept it as a possibility, but I don't think it's very likely...

Reply to bobef,

> Don Clugston Wrote:
> 
>> I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce
>> ethical
>> behaviour is not the right approach...
>> Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like:
>> "the author requests that ..."
>> and put it under a standard license.
> I see no lawyers in the whole thing. Looking at my English dictionary
> I understand the word "license" as "the author requests that ...". I
> haven't mentioned lawyers, have I? If you think of how this legal
> nonsense (because the state it is today is real madness in my opinion)
> begun it was just that. People *agreed* to follow some common rules.
> Today nobody agrees anything. Everybody is just forced, assuming that
> he agreed to be forced... Anyway... If it sounds "legal" to you-
> fine.
> 
> "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not
> used in a way that will result harm to anyone or anything sentient"
> 

"I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used in a way that will result [in] (harm to anyone) or (anything sentient)"

What I can't use your front-end in a Turing class AI?

"BCS" <ao@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:ce0a3343b0638c97c93a9a049da@news.digitalmars.com...
>
> "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used in a way that will result [in] (harm to anyone) or (anything sentient)"
>
> What I can't use your front-end in a Turing class AI?
>

Nice interpretation ;)