Apache and the JSON license

Posted Dec 2, 2016 6:23 UTC (Fri) by gdt (subscriber, #6284)
In reply to: Apache and the JSON license by elw
Parent article: Apache and the JSON license

such ambiguous language has no place in a software license, or any license for that matter

I can't agree. It's Douglas's code. He can license it how he sees fit. There's no obligation on him that a license be convenient for lawyers or that a license be a free software license. The license isn't pretending to be something it isn't, so there's no misrepresentation. If clarity is your requirement then no one forces use of this code.

I'm not even convinced that this is poor legal procedure. For example, summary judgment against this license seems unlikely, since the nature of evil and a licensee's compliance with non-evil are matters of fact.

Apache and the JSON license

Posted Dec 2, 2016 18:20 UTC (Fri) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link] (1 responses)

> It's Douglas's code. He can license it how he sees fit.

Allow me to rephrase. While the law does indeed say that it is Douglas's code and he can license it however he sees fit, such ambiguous language has no place in a license for software you actually want other people to *use*. Perhaps Douglas does not intend for the code to be used by anyone other than himself, and that is perfectly fine. However, the ambiguous license language makes the software toxic to anyone else, legally speaking: it is impossible to know whether one will later be found to have complied with the license or held liable for copyright infringement. If he wants the software to be adopted by others (and why else would he release it with an almost-open license?) then his purpose would be best served by leaving out the ambiguous language.

Apache and the JSON license

Posted Dec 2, 2016 21:26 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Well, it's not toxic to evildoers. They don't care about licenses -- they'll use whatever they want.

It's only toxic to the good guys.