On Sat, 29 May 2004, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
For the Web specs and code we rejected the GPL and made both public
domain. Getting Microsoft and IBM to build the Web into
their products
was a big priority. That could not have happened if the original
reference code had been encumbered.
Since when are talking about reference code, here? This is about a
*patent* license and making it GPL compatible (as well as BSD,
proprietary or whatever) is, in fact, important.
Exactly, but the point I am making is that a license that is
GPL compatible could fall well short of what we need.
It must be possible to distribute code under GPL, BSD or closed
proprietary licenses. A GPL grant would only allow one of those.
Would LGPL allow for more options including BSD license?
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net