Subject: Re: OVPL and open ownership
From: Chris Zumbrunn <chris@czv.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:54:57 +0200


On Jul 25, 2005, at 10:16 AM, David Barrett wrote:

> At worst, a contributor can choose not to grant 3.3 to the ID for any 
> code he submits

I believe that is what is unacceptable to David Ryan and Alex.

> And I want to confirm that 3.3 is not a convenience; it's the sole 
> value of the OVPL.  My whole intent is to ensure that *more* code is 
> covered by 3.3 by making it the default submission license.  Indeed, 
> my concern with the BSD proposal is that it *guarantees* all 
> contributions will *not* covered by 3.3 -- a step in exactly the wrong 
> direction.

You are misunderstanding this. If a contributor can opt-out of 3.3 then 
you will not be able to use his contribution in your proprietary 
version. If a contributor has to contribute under a BSD-style license 
then you can.

> Have I made this point clear?  If so (or if not), can you detail 
> precisely why you believe my proposal does a worse job protecting the 
> ID's privilege than licensing under BSD?  Can you give a concrete 
> example under which it would be preferable to the ID to obtain 
> contributions under a BSD license, versus under OVPL (with or without 
> 3.3)?

See above :-)

Chris