(Request/propose) license change
brendan at mozilla.com
Mon Sep 2 18:56:22 PDT 2013
> musicdenotation at gmail.com <mailto:musicdenotation at gmail.com>
> September 2, 2013 6:35 PM
> First, I should not have changed the thread's name. That mail I wrote
> on a keypad mobile phone in a hurry, and so I was too
> lazy to write the entire original thread's name.
> Second, I have no plan to distribute the specification outside of the
> current license's scope. I am doing that as part of the
> I'm not the kind of guy you think, that's why I first raised the issue
> here and not by directly contacting Ecma. I need the support of you
> and other ECMAScript designers to convince Ecma International.
> Let's start a petition.
> To Ecma International: Release the ECMAScript specification under
> Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 / Open Web Foundation License 1.0
We'll take this up at the next TC39 meeting, I don't think you need a
But since you have no plan to use the spec outside of the current
license, may I ask what is driving you to post multiple times about it
to es-discuss, talk about a petition, etc.? It seems overwrought.
Anyway, we your faithful TC39ers will take this up with Ecma people. It
has been an issue recently with W3C too, where tantek at mozilla.com has
been championing CC0.
> ---Original message---
> From: Brendan Eich
> Sent: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 12:59:15 -0700
> To: <|jackalmage at gmail.com|><| musicdenotation at gmail.com|>
> Subject: Re: License change
> New thread, good points. I'll make two more:
> 1. es-discuss is not the best place for complaints about the spec
> license and random suggestions to move standardization to the WHATWG.
> 2. It would help us, musicdenotation, if we knew you better. I'm not
> insisting on a true name but at least some deeds that show contribution
> to JS, at some level. Otherwise, your whole approach is kind of like a
> bossy stranger who wants to "get" without any "give". See what I mean?
More information about the es-discuss