MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Adam Ficsor <adam.ficsor73@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 18:25:50 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEPKjgfJxFebb2NaoT1Jet9_wzcpTbQvq0jk+d6Qi6DZExJB=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045c15e846c80105651b4906"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Possible change to the MIT license
Precedence: list

--f403045c15e846c80105651b4906
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I agree with the opposition on changing the license, because of the
branding attacks.

However having two coins with the same Proof Of Work is a zero sum game
from a security point of view. It may not be a bad idea to consider
changing the license in a way that only limits cryptocurrencies with the
same Proof Of Work, since they directly affect the stability and security
of Bitcoin.

--f403045c15e846c80105651b4906
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">I agree with the opposition on changing the license, becau=
se of the branding attacks.<br><br>However having two coins with the same P=
roof Of Work is a zero sum game from a security point of view. It may not b=
e a bad idea to consider changing the license in a way that only limits cry=
ptocurrencies with the same Proof Of Work, since they directly affect the s=
tability and security of Bitcoin.<br></div>

--f403045c15e846c80105651b4906--