From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-25 20:39:13
Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:
> [2003-06-25] Beman Dawes wrote:
>>For more background, including rationale, a FAQ, and acknowledgements, see
>>* Boosters for whom English isn't their primary language; is the license
> Spanish is my first, but English is a very close second. The
> impression I got is that it's somewhat hard to parse as it is. I had
> to read the second "paragraph" a few times before I managed to parse
> out the different parts of it.
> The main difficulty in the first part (the first two "paragraphs")
> is the the lists in it are inconsistent and hard to see which are
> the items. For example, the switching from simple items to adding
> "and" in some of them threw me. I was expecting the list to end, but
> it did not. The second paragraph is long; and without any separators
> other than the commas it's hard to read.
> Here's an edited version which might be better for non-english
> readers to understand:
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person or organization
> obtaining a copy of the software covered by this license (the "Software")
> to: use, reproduce, display, distribute, execute, transmit,
This part of the list lacks a subject "The Software".
> prepare derivative works of the Software,
Which you want to avoid confusing with this.
This part of the license has been fairly carefully worked out. It's
good to make things read more easily, but they must retain their
> and to permit third-parties to whom the Software is furnished to do
I prefer "and to permit others to do so". This phrase has just been
approved by the lawyers as legally equivalent, and it's much easier to
read, so I hope we'll use it.
> all subject to the following:
> The copyright notice in the Software and this entire statement, including
> the above license grant, this restriction, and the following disclaimer,
> must be included, in whole or in part, in all copies of the
> Software, and
That makes it sounds like it's OK to include just part of the
copyright, license, etc. Once again my remarks (**) apply here.
> all derivative works of the Software. Unless such copies or derivative works
> are solely in the form of machine-executable object code generated by a
> source language processor.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk