Subject: Re: Article on open-source licenses (and the OSI)
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:48:08 -0500 (EST)

Karsten M. Self writes:
 > The discussion of OSI certification is again unclear and IMO misleading,
 > perhaps reflection a lack of clarity on the part of the OSI.

Possibly.  It certainly would seem to be a loophole that you could use
the BSD license on binary code for which source is not available.  We
pondered doing something about this, then decided to give credit to
the open source developer for having some brains.  Without source
code, how could anybody call it open source??

*If* we were going to do something about it, I would say that we only
certify source code.  Binaries are derivative works.

 > The suggestion that the OSI focus on licensing conflicts is interesting,
 > but, given experience, hopelessly optimistic.  Education on the issues
 > is one thing, actively tangling in disputes quite another, from an
 > organizational, operational, and resources standpoint.

Yes, license compatibility is a morass.  If you thought Vietnam was
bad, wait until you see Afghanistan.  As Vizini said, "Never get
involved in a land war in Asia".

-- 
-russ nelson <sig@russnelson.com>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | Why are we still fighting
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | the war on drugs when there
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | is a real war to fight?
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3