Flower opened

[Alexander Panek]

Gregor Richards wrote:
> bobef wrote:
>> Gregor Richards Wrote:
>>
>>> Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly 
>>> nonsensical.
>>>
>>> If I modify your code, and then give it to a friend of mine, and they 
>>> modify it, and then they give it to somebody else, and then their 
>>> third cousin twice removed borrows their computer and sends the code 
>>> to their great-grand-niece's lesbian life partner's dog's groomer's 
>>> husband, and he works for NASA and decides to give it to his 
>>> astronaut friend who runs it while in space, and it hangs and causes 
>>> the life support systems to fail temporarily, which makes somebody's 
>>> breathing a bit awkward for a minute, I've just violated your license 
>>> while not even touching your software. 
>>
>> If you think this is going to be the case, don't give it to your 
>> friend. As simple as that ;)
> 
> Wow, way to make an "open" license that's not open in the least, and 
> then defend it with a smug, meaningless sentence.
> 
> "If you think this is going to be the case" means "unless you are 
> psychic", because nobody can truly predict what is going to be done with 
> something they give to a friend. No license which requires its users to 
> be psychic ... hell, no such license even makes any effing sense.
> 
>  - Gregor Richards

Seems like someone missed the point of licenses here. :\
(Apart from looking uber cool in a source file, that is.)