From: "Mauricio Fernández" <batsman.geo@...>
Date: 2003-07-12T01:23:06+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Humans and dictionaries (was Re: My brief and torrid affairwithRuby.)

On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 01:15:26AM +0900, Sean O'Dell wrote:
> > > How about we start calling it "socialist licensing" instead?
> >
> > "Pro-choice licensing" might also be a term that people could really get
> >   united around, especially here in the southeastern United States where
> > I live.
> >
> > And now, a disclaimer for the humor-impaired.
> >
> > I am being sarcastic. I am fairly sure that Sean was also being sarcastic.
> 
> "Pro-choice licensing" is a great alternative, I think we should run with
> that!

Sure. I have always opted for pro-choice licensing in my software.
All the users of my programs have the freedom to abort processes and
remove the software. At any time, no questions asked, for free.
Specifically, they're not forced to keep the software running forever
if they don't delete it within the first 2 months.

-- 
 _           _                             
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ 
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
	Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

Microsoft is not the answer.
Microsoft is the question.
NO (or Linux) is the answer.
	-- Taken from a .signature from someone from the UK, source unknown