Subject: Re: Are implicit dual-licensing agreements inherently anti-open?
From: Michael Bernstein <webmaven@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:12:07 -0700

On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 18:20 -0400, Mark Shewmaker wrote:
> 
> Interestingly enough, while OSD #1 specifically precludes a required
> royalty or fee for the sale (or distribution) of Open Source Software,
> OSD #3 doesn't specifically preclude a required royalty or fee for
> modification of Open Source software.

Ouch. Sounds like a bug.

- Michael Bernstein