Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 12:15:15AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> No, I really am lost here. Is your argument:
>
> a) compulsion of provision of freedoms (as in the GPL, for instance) is
> non-free, or
>
> b) compulsion of provision one set of freedoms to some people and a
> different set to others is non-free
More specifically, b) one set of freedoms to everyone and an extra set to a
subset. (Exclusive sets--one license to teachers, another license to
everyone else, no overlap--is a different and stranger issue, one which
has been pondered here in passing but never seriously discussed.)
I think b) is only non-free if I'm required to grant freedoms to one or
the other group that I wasn't granted myself, such that I'm required to
redistribute derived works under different terms than those I received
myself; DSFG#3.
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: