Subject: Re: For Approval: Open Source Software Alliance License
From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:09:26 -0400

David Presotto scripsit:

> As an aside, it might have been less inflamatory if the license has said ``if
> source of the program and any derivatives is distributed under an inheritive
> license (e.g. GPL), it must ALSO be distributed under this license.''
> Then Sean would always have access to changed code for his proprietary works
> if anyone has access to them.  Someone must have suggested this already but
> I don't see it in the archive.

No, no one has, and I think this is quite a clever idea.  It's appropriate
to apply it to derivative works only, not to to distributions of
unchanged code.

Sean, what do you think?

-- 
Deshil Holles eamus.  Deshil Holles eamus.  Deshil Holles eamus.
Send us, bright one, light one, Horhorn, quickening, and wombfruit. (3x)
Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!  Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!  Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!
  -- Joyce, _Ulysses_, "Oxen of the Sun"       jcowan@reutershealth.com
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3