From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC7561321 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 22:02:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk0-f42.google.com (mail-vk0-f42.google.com [209.85.213.42]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 352B11B0 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 22:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vkbf67 with SMTP id f67so60018579vkb.0 for ; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 15:02:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=evOFLPilh0wo8X12N1HIXjNhyFm4DV746ZN21U6G9kI=; b=L4G5vStBnFqiSJZatjCTsZeZnPrOJtPWKbHAnPZaY3xyjMLiKkOoCr9ZQoVByEvF+2 vz9uKPTXSMTfTK6tJC3eApzhzvpd5oHkQkg5Dchq07wbM9jCTjYR+XPvjCNWGLRuHXFK 1SfiZW2t9Xk6+TCIF56q3eT58L4xHUvq6RlHFcH9Aja18CfaXbWsDuJ0GDE92BhLkC7v uSTJ+InvlGZuCHeSPQahlPn2AS5MoSvB9PYGZJKOOHvwjkgk/vfTzFy8HsaQhWFU2qxB Bdxi7tXunErkhDA/CjrsBjUl26A3RGHN/Y4W9vxSbIyS4Ciniadi9uB5mS44M4EhD5hX VXGw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.243.232 with SMTP id xb8mr31829995vdc.40.1441144956292; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 15:02:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.109.134 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 15:02:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55E61A64.2030609@bitcoins.info> References: <55E61A64.2030609@bitcoins.info> Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 23:02:36 +0100 Message-ID: From: Ahmed Zsales To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1d63e309488051eb6b5e3 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Open Block Chain Licence, BIP[xxxx] Draft X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 22:02:37 -0000 --001a11c1d63e309488051eb6b5e3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Russ, The general points and questions you have raised are covered in the draft BIP: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBMVFxajNZa2hzMTg/view?usp=sharing Regards, Ahmed On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > 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. >> > > Like I said, you need to talk to a lawyer. What exactly would be the > purpose of any license? How can someone be a "beneficiary" to a license > when you can't even explain who holds the license to begin with? How do > they "benefit?" I don't see any purpose to putting a license on the Core > software or the blockchain because nobody can explain who actually holds > the license and there is no mechanism to enforce any license and there is > no revenue to be shared. The whole discussion makes no sense. > > Russ > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --001a11c1d63e309488051eb6b5e3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Russ,

The general points and ques= tions you have raised are covered in the draft BIP:


Regards,

<= /div>
Ahmed

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wro= te:
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.

 Like I said, you need to talk to a lawyer.=C2=A0 What exactly would be the = purpose of any license?=C2=A0 How can someone be a "beneficiary" = to a license when you can't even explain who holds the license to begin= with?=C2=A0 How do they "benefit?"=C2=A0 I don't see any pur= pose to putting a license on the Core software or the blockchain because no= body can explain who actually holds the license and there is no mechanism t= o enforce any license and there is no revenue to be shared.=C2=A0 The whole= discussion makes no sense.

Russ



_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--001a11c1d63e309488051eb6b5e3--