📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01
📝 Original message:That is a very good point.
We considered whether data existing before a licence change would be
covered, but we hadn't factored the potential need for gaining permissions
for a change to be considered effective.
We have proposed that miners be the main beneficiaries of licensing and
there is a consideration on whether they should vote to adopt the new
terms. While not the preferred route, that would overcome any issues to
what is an otherwise honest 'error and omission.' There doesn't seem to be
anyone who could claim to have suffered any economic losses so this may not
be an issue. It merits further investigation.
The block chain is in perpetual change, so the sooner a change is agreed
upon, if at all, the more data it will cover without any reservations. At
any rate, we believe the changes would be considered effective on a
retrospective basis.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Btc Drak <btcdrak at gmail.com> wrote:
> Without commenting on your proposal at all, the general problem with
> licensing after the fact is you require the permission of every
> copyright holder in order to make the change.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > We believe the network requires a block chain licence to supplement the
> > existing MIT Licence which we believe only covers the core reference
> client
> > software.
> >
> > Replacing or amending the existing MIT Licence is beyond the scope of
> this
> > draft BIP.
> >
> > Rationale and details of our draft BIP for discussion and evaluation are
> > here:
> >
> >
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBMVFxajNZa2hzMTg/view?usp=sharing
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ahmed
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150901/0cccdded/attachment.html>;
Ahmed Zsales [ARCHIVE] /
npub105…lgz5a
2023-06-07 17:39:01
in reply to nevent1q…3kls
Author Public Key
npub105eg2ny7gs448umtlsn4ns4slc5q3se8wpnzhtr22j8sgdrv2q7stlgz5aPublished at
2023-06-07 17:39:01Event JSON
{
"id": "5925210719f9a14de63993f93d57d3c037551a0559d113cad5596cb3698fec32",
"pubkey": "7d32854c9e442b53f36bfc2759c2b0fe2808c32770662bac6a548f04346c503d",
"created_at": 1686159541,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"89a8564b0381eb9568c793c79e358089ddd2d980a31babc3b47efd374cf7b99e",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"bf2b9ed261f9edea0668ce41fc57961b938ff48645a103ca0195fc30d0ddc74f",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"fdf31024ca0537ed828d895ddc8525f8af023f0dc935a8327a8a496d0d7a9f83"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01\n📝 Original message:That is a very good point.\n\nWe considered whether data existing before a licence change would be\ncovered, but we hadn't factored the potential need for gaining permissions\nfor a change to be considered effective.\n\nWe have proposed that miners be the main beneficiaries of licensing and\nthere is a consideration on whether they should vote to adopt the new\nterms. While not the preferred route, that would overcome any issues to\nwhat is an otherwise honest 'error and omission.' There doesn't seem to be\nanyone who could claim to have suffered any economic losses so this may not\nbe an issue. It merits further investigation.\n\nThe block chain is in perpetual change, so the sooner a change is agreed\nupon, if at all, the more data it will cover without any reservations. At\nany rate, we believe the changes would be considered effective on a\nretrospective basis.\n\n\nOn Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Btc Drak \u003cbtcdrak at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Without commenting on your proposal at all, the general problem with\n\u003e licensing after the fact is you require the permission of every\n\u003e copyright holder in order to make the change.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Hello,\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e We believe the network requires a block chain licence to supplement the\n\u003e \u003e existing MIT Licence which we believe only covers the core reference\n\u003e client\n\u003e \u003e software.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Replacing or amending the existing MIT Licence is beyond the scope of\n\u003e this\n\u003e \u003e draft BIP.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Rationale and details of our draft BIP for discussion and evaluation are\n\u003e \u003e here:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBMVFxajNZa2hzMTg/view?usp=sharing\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Regards,\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Ahmed\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e \u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150901/0cccdded/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "981765a4b56598ac77de5e53d6b9dbd9b681bd6ecc78fe14bde5aa722615fbb4c7f6594f9625cbd26b9a4e70d84509baabf6d522cc817f1813511e0ec2520383"
}