Good analysis. What is wrong with using a BSD license for graphics? No
one has explained that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 23. August 2006 18:29 schrieb Joshua D. Drake:
> > Well, in the spirit of the BSD I would say:
> >
> > Attribution (by)
> >
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/
>
> Well, the main problem with that license is that it prohibits you from copying
> the works over encrypted links or storing the works on encrypted media or a
> computer protected by a password.
>
> "You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly
> digitally perform the Work with any technological measures that control
> access"
>
> The more general problem is that it is excessively complicated and ambiguously
> worded and doesn't achieve anything beyond what the BSD license does.
>
> If the BSD license is too complicated still, I can offer the following
> alternative license: "You may use, modify and redistribute this software as
> you wish."
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut
> http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
