Re: IBM Jikes license
From: Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>
> For better or worse, we have a proposed re-write of the DFSG being
> considered (and it's been being worked on for quite a while).
Can I see it, please?
> This rewrite would indicate that software is not DFSG if the copyright
> holder is also the patent holder and in some way restricts the
> distribution of the software based on the patents.
Not a bad idea. But where do you draw the line? IBM didn't want to see
you incorporate one line of their source code as a blanket license to
use all of their patents. So, they said 60%. It seems rather ineffectual
to me, because I can think of lots of ways to get around it.
> However, this whole situation does indicate that "openness" or
> "freedom" exist on a spectrum, and aren't black and white issues.
We will see some evolution of the idea of Open Source to deal with these
concerns. I think OSD could use some additions on the topic of patents.
Thanks
Bruce
--
The $70 Billion US "budget surplus" hardly offsets our $5 Trillion national
debt. The debt increased by $133 Billion in the same year we found a
"surplus".
Bruce Perens K6BP bruce@pixar.com 510-620-3502 NCI-1001
Reply to: