On 2013-02-14 12:19, "Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)" wrote:
On 2013-02-14 11:40, Richard Fontana wrote:
Does anyone think the idea of a limited-term copyleft -- particularly given that copyleft-next is a software-oriented license -- is a good/bad idea?
It is an excellent idea! I'd like to think this idea has been brewing in your mind since I mentioned it about a year ago. :-)
I had the idea when I saw @zooko's license, which is precisely the opposite -- permissive for two years (IIRC), then strengthening to copyleft.
One year.
https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/browser/trunk/COPYING.TGPPL.rst
"to distribute or communicate copies of the Original Work and Derivative Works to the public, with the proviso that copies of Original Work or Derivative Works that You distribute or communicate shall be licensed under this Transitive Grace Period Public Licence no later than 12 months after You distributed or communicated said copies"
@zooko is https://identi.ca/zooko .