Subject: FW: OSL Version 1.0 dated 8/2/2002
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 10:37:32 -0700

> Yes, it is a "cow-catcher."  How would you suggest I reword 
> it to make it less onerous yet still get the beneficial 
> result of reciprocity?  I don't believe, by the way, that 
> making the source code available for externally-deployed open 
> source applications is much of a burden considering that you 
> are getting that software for free.  Consider placing on your 
> news delivery site a button that says "Powered by OSI 
> Certified Open Source Software.  Click here for further 
> information and to obtain the source code."  Nothing in the 
> OSL requires that you keep the source code on your site for 3 
> years, by the way.  The obligation only lasts as long as you 
> continue to "distribute" the work.  /Larry
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 9:44 AM
> > To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com
> > Cc: license-discuss@opensource.org
> > Subject: Re: OSL Version 1.0 dated 8/2/2002
> > 
> > 
> > Lawrence E. Rosen scripsit:
> > 
> > >   5.  External Deployment.  The term "External Deployment"
> > >   means the use or distribution of the Original Work or
> > >   Derivative Works in any way such that the Original 
> > >   Work or Derivative Works may be accessed or used by
> > >   anyone other than You, used to provide any services
> > >   to anyone other than You, or used in any way to
> > >   deliver any content to anyone other than You,
> > >   whether the Original Work or Derivative Works are
> > >   distributed to those persons, made available as an
> > >   application intended for use over a computer network,
> > >   or used to provide services or otherwise deliver
> > >   content to anyone other than You.
> > 
> > This last clause seems to me to be rather too much of a cow-catcher.
> > Suppose:
> > 
> > a)	gcc were licensed under a future GPL with such a provision
> > 
> > b)	I wrote and compiled with gcc a program
> > 
> > c)	this program was an essential element in delivering news
> > 	to my employer's paying subscribers
> > 
> > then the license would deem me a distributor of gcc, bound to
> > provide source for three years and all that rot? gcc is being 
> > "used to deliver content", since using it is an indispensable 
> > step in the chain of actions that leads to content being delivered.
> 

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3