[Tinyos-alliance] Notes 3-28

[dculler]

Thanks Rob.  Jack sent around some material following last week's meeting.
Our goal tomorrow is to critique the draft from last week and to work
through the refinements from Rob, Jack and Phil.

Lama, were you able to set up a bridge?  

-----Original Message-----
From: tinyos-alliance-bounces at millennium.berkeley.edu
[mailto:tinyos-alliance-bounces at millennium.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Robert
Szewczyk
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 5:36 PM
To: 'David E. Culler'; tinyos-alliance at mail.millennium.berkeley.edu
Subject: RE: [Tinyos-alliance] Notes 3-28

 
I'm attaching the proposed license.   The license attempts to accomplish the
following things:

- follow standard wording and standard clauses to minimize the layer hours.
The license is patterned after Apache Software License 1.1 
- Offer a single point for getting trademark permission.   The license
specifically calls out the TinyOS and TinyOS Alliance trademarks; and
provides trademark at tinyos.net as the point of contact.  
- the original author retains the copyright, and the individual contributors
are to be acknowledged in the end user documentation (if any). 

I've also dropped the last two clauses from the original proposal.  One of
them required that any suit brought with regard to the license be brought in
the jurisdiction of the copyright holder, and the last one detailed what
happens on the breach of a license.   

On a few occasions David mentioned that the suit clause from the original
license is tricky, but in the end I did not quite understand the reasoning
behind the statements.  Do we believe that including such a clause in the
license would scare off the potential adoption?  

I've also dropped the license termination clause.   This makes the license
wording much more positive as it contains no hostile language.  Dropping the
clause also adds potential uncertainty, as the license is now mute as to
what happens in case of a breach.  

Cheers,

Rob

Robert Szewczyk
Moteiv Corporation