
The Microsoft Permissive License, one of two licenses the software maker submitted to the Open Source Initiative for approval as open-source licenses in August, is unlikely to be approved in its current form. There have been
two principle objections to the license from the open-source community, Michael Tiemann, the president of OSI, told eWEEK in an interview here at the annual Gartner Open Source Summit on Sept. 20. The first objection is that the use of the word 'permissive' in the license title implies an expectation that the license does not meet. The second complaint is that the MS-PL is incompatible with a large number of other open-source licenses, he said.
Member since:
2005-07-11
The name "General Public License" would seem to suggest "Public Domain", which GPL definitely is not.
What straw man are you attacking? Not that I claim to be an expert on the GPL, but I think it's terms do a decent job of keeping control of code and other resources in the public domain.
Just what do you think public domain means anyway?