Subject: Re: OVPL Summary, Take 2
From: Chris Zumbrunn <>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 12:36:12 +0200

On Sep 16, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Alex Bligh wrote:

> --On 16 September 2005 00:30 -0700 David Barrett 
> <> wrote:
>> Furthermore, given that the "dual licensing" tactic is embraced as
>> open-source compatible, and given that the OVPL produces an 
>> effectively
>> equivalent result, the OVPL's goals should likewise be embraced as
>> open-source compatible.
> I don't think the OVPL produces an equivalent result to dual licensing
> (or we would have done that!). In dual licensed software, the recipient
> has the choice of license. In the OVPL, there is no choice. However,
> what is true is that dual licensed software can also produce asymmetry
> (which is the point that was brought up).

But in that case the asymmetry is not in the open source license, like 
it is
in the OVPL. With dual licensing the ID as to get the ok from all 
to produce a proprietary work, like any other contributor would, unless 
license allows all contributors to sub-license as part of proprietary