Subject: Re: Draft 1 of the OpenDesk.com Public Source License
From: bruce@perens.com (Bruce Perens)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 15:32:40 -0800 (PST)

From: Alex Nicolaou <anicolao@cgl.uwaterloo.ca>
> This is equivalent to forking the project at the start, unless you add
> an addendum to the GPL that stipulates that GPL contributors permit you
> to take their changes and re-release them under the APSL clone. Of
> course, then it's not GPL anymore.

You could use the LGPL and protect "commercial work" just as well, while
promoting the development of free applications. Under the APSL, there's
less incentive for a developer to contribute time to an application,
since he doesn't have the option to GPL the application. Under the LGPL,
you can use any license on your application.

> Besides, I have discovered that amongst my users and potential contributors
> there exists a great apathy about what license I use anyway!

In that case, I urge you to withdraw your request for Open Source
certification of the SOS license. It would do active harm to the free
software community for OSI to accept yet another license that contributes
as little as this one over the existing licenses. The only contribution
you're making a real case for is simplicity. Unfortunately, that's
deceptive: no attorney was involved in the license creation and there
is on assurance that unsimple implications could be lurking unseen in
your terms.

	Thanks

	Bruce