Subject: RE: External deployment / Otherwise Make Available (was Re: OVPL summary)
From: "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:42:31 -0700

Alex Bligh wrote:
2. Any software that the non-excluded person interacts with in an automatic
   manner (i.e. without human intervention). This is a plausible definition,
   but is very very wide. As you say, a modified OSL licensed accounts
   system that happened to have a link into an online system, which (for
   instance) let the user order things (involving checking credit balances)
   would be covered. Perhaps after all, that's the right thing. If they
   can see their statement on-line, then isn't that an ASP accounts system?

Please don't refer to software that "happened to have a link into" another
system. Linking is not relevant under OSL 3.0. That license only demands
reciprocity for modifications to the OSL-licensed software. See the list of
verbs in section 1(b).

Perhaps the fear that linking makes a difference is what concerns people
about the External Deployment provision. But under OSL 3.0, even if I deploy
an accounts system and it is considered "used" by the courts because of some
convoluted technical evaluation, there should be no fear that other
proprietary systems that merely link to it are similarly "used." The most
that would have to be disclosed are the changes to the OSL-licensed
software.

/Larry Rosen