Subject: Re: Unexercisable rights
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:02:22 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> "Brock" == R Brock Lynn <brock@cyberdude.com> writes:

    Brock> But then, what would be the point of the libre software
    Brock> license in the first place?  Wouldn't some kind of
    Brock> creative, "only a select few licensees can exchange code
    Brock> among themselves" be in order in this instance, instead of
    Brock> a libre software license?

Probably true.

However, it is socially desirable that the license be libre as once it 
does leak (because it is no longer a competitive advantage, say),
everybody gets it.

It may be privately desirable as well, because it ensures a level
playing field among the group (creating goodwill for the original
vendor), but does not prevent the original vendor from expanding the
group at his discretion.  There may be more complex ways of achieving
the same thing, but the more complex the less goodwill.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
What are those two straight lines for?  "Free software rules."