On 4/12/17 14:52, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
A licence which understands that there is a legal world outside the United States of America and it is not the same needs to be longer.
Many would find the Boost licence insufficiently specified to give clarity and lack of ambiguity.
The BSL was written with international consideration in mind. And most of the long language you see in other licenses was deemed superfluous as it was already covered by various international treaties and accords. Obviously, IANAL, but that is my recollection from the various discussions and legal team at the time of the BSL.
With respect, the aversion to Boost code by corporate legal teams is very well known here. Both in the US and outside.
reference please -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com