Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [epl-discuss] Materials for EPL Call

On 2017-01-30 2:51 PM, Weinstock, Nicholas Matthew Neft wrote:
First I wanted to mention the defined term "Contributor," which essentially redefines the word to mean "distributor."

Some uses of the term make sense as "distributor," but many uses are confusing in the situation that a distributor has not made any changes or additions.  I know it's difficult to come up with an alternative that doesn't result in a circular definition, but it seems like this is a good opportunity to make the wording more clear for laypeople.

I would like to reply on this topic right away. We did talk briefly on the call about this.

These are just my personal thoughts, not any official or consensus position.

First I would like to mention that I had originally started with the opinion that fixing this somewhat odd definition should be an objective for the EPLv2. But I have personally looked at the drafting changes that would be required to do this, and I came away with the thought that it would be more trouble than it is worth. I think to achieve the clarity that you're describing you would have to split contributor and distributor into two different definitions, and then revise the license with great care to cover both cases. The end result would be something that reads quite differently than the current EPL.

So I am not philosphically opposed to fixing this. But I know that I (for one) am not smart enough to do it gracefully. If you or anyone else have revisions to propose, I am sure that we would all like to see them.

Mike Milinkovich
+1.613.220.3223 (mobile)

Back to the top