> > Real IP lawyers cost real money. Anyone working pro-bono on something of this size > probably isn't qualified to work on it. > So gather some (money) if solid legal ground is a long term goal. It would seem a > shame to go through all the work and hassle to find out later, when it really > mattered, that something wasn't done right. I'm not sure size, I'm assuming you mean > the size of the code base, is entirely relevant here. You just need someone who can > accurately explain the history of MAME/MESS development, how the license changes have > been handled previously, and figure out what needs to be done to move in the desired > direction. Sure, maybe that's not as good as paying gobs of money to have a lawyer > sort through it all by themselves but I think it would be better than a bunch of > software developers' legal advice. > > In Aaron's initial post he laments the situation of having a license that wasn't > written/verified by a lawyer. So why forge ahead with a plan equally unverified?
Who is to say legal advice has not already been acquired over the years. MAME has been through the wringer a few times since the old license was put in place. If a course of action has already been determined, you don't necessarily need to pay a lawyer to sort out the details.
//80% of a lawyers job is knowing what forms to fill out. The other 20% is kissing the judges ass.