Subject: Re: Dual licensing
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 01:06:57 -0700

Quoting Marius Amado Alves (amado.alves@netcabo.pt):

> I'm only trying to add to that the requirement that a part of any 
> generated revenue is payed to the authors (if they want). 

Hmm.  Remember, the primary conceptual concerns of the OSD are the
long-term freedoms of developers and users.  OSD #2 says, among other
things:

   2. Source Code

   [...] Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code,
   there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for
   no more than a reasonable reproduction cost -- preferably, downloading via
   the Internet without charge. 

Requiring royalties for particular _uses_ of the software after lawful 
aquisition is probably not even possible legally, let alone compliant
with the spirit of the OSD:  In the USA, at least, people have the right
to execute code they've acquired lawfully, by statute -- or such is my
recollection from an Eben Moglen piece at the time of SCO Group's
initial legal filing.

This might be one of the reasons why the OSD text never quite gets
around to saying that recipients must have the right to use code for any
purpose without original-developer strings attached:  It's assumed.

(Hi, Bruce.  Maybe you as the OSD's original author can comment.)

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