Subject: RE: Definition of open source
From: "Michael R. Bernstein" <>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 10:30:45 -0800

On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 10:09, Alan Rihm wrote:
> Michael - We had a reputable firm in Philadelphia (PA) give us an
> opinion, and the resulting opinion was that current OSI approved
> licenses (single or dual strategy) do not serve our purposes "as-is".

Was this a law-firm?

You're still not answering with specifics.

Exactly *why* would a dual-license strategy not serve your purposes?
Unless you answer that, I can't tell you whether (or why) the changes
you think you require are unneccessary.

> They noted that other clients were also unable to utilize existing
> licenses to serve their needs without certain modifications that
> currently conflict with the OSI definition.

Again, specifics, please.

Michael R. Bernstein <>