Re: Open Content Licence is non-free?
On Sun, Nov 07, 1999 at 03:20:48PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: Richard Braakman <email@example.com>
> > The first part only allows distribution for money if it's "for use offline".
> > This forbids distribution for money over a network. Either makes
> > it non-free.
> I think this is just like the Artistic license restriction - notice the word
> "sole". It means that you can charge for more than one file, but not for this
> file exclusively. I think it's sloppy, but I don't think it takes the license
> out of DFSG compliance.
However, the rest of the paragraph talks about different methods of
distribution, not different sets of files. I think it is reasonable
to interpret the word "sole" to exclude other means of distribution,
not other files.