[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: at which level, is adequate licensing documentation required?
|
From: |
Richard Stallman |
|
Subject: |
Re: at which level, is adequate licensing documentation required? |
|
Date: |
Wed, 30 Jun 2021 19:58:38 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> + <li id="B2-1"><p>Explains each of the licensing options,
> + distinguishing between GNU 2 only and GPL 2-or-later,
> the ambiguity in that phrase, is that it is not obvious, _which_
> licensing options should be explained
What I have in mind is, the licensing options that the site offers.
This presumes that the site offers licensing options. Since sites do
tend to offer licensing options, I presumed they all would do that.
Should B2 reject sites that say nothing about licensing options?
--
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)