On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:37:07 +0900, Phil Tomson <ptkwt / aracnet.com> wrote:

> I suggested this in another thread, but perhaps it wasn't widely read:
> In order to address the paranoia about Ruby's licensing scheme perhaps
> the Ruby Foundation (the soon-to-be non-profit Foundation for funding Ruby
> projects) could hire an IP lawyer to look into Ruby's license scheme and
> then either issue an opinion exonerating Ruby's license or issue an
> opinion suggesting changes that might be needed.  I suspect this would
> be $1000 to $2000 well spent to dispense with the licensing FUD that
> seems to be out there.  Then when questions about Ruby license come up we
> could point them to a web page that shows a letter from a Lawyer that
> would (hopefully) ease people's fears.  Or, if the Lawyer comes back with
> some problem areas perhaps we could address them.

I don't have a problem with Ruby's license, but I've not yet been in
the position of needing to integrate it into commercial software.

But I guess my follow-up question, directed to those people do in fact
have fears about Ruby's license situation,  is this: If Ruby Central
(http://www.rubycentral.org) did in fact have a letter from a lawyer
explaining how it's all good, would that matter to you? If not, what
would it take for you (or more likely your company's legal department)
to be happy? I wouldn't want Ruby Central to waste their funds on a
symbolic gesture that doesn't really solve the problem.