[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OSD && DFSG convergence

John Goerzen writes:
 > On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 12:55:05PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
 > > Hi.  I'm the vice-president of the Open Source Initiative, and I'm
 > > writing to you today in that stead.
 > In another message, you asked if there were some substantive differences
 > between the OSD and the DFSG.  I can say, yes there are, even if not
 > immediately visible at the surface.
 > For one, I would point to clause 12.1(c) of the APSL.  It states that your
 > license to use any and all APSL code terminates if you ever "commence an
 > action for patent infringement against Apple."  This, to me, is an onerous
 > requirement -- if Apple has violated your patent, even in a completely
 > unrelated matter, the fact that you exercise your legal right to defend your
 > patent shouldn't impact your right to use Open Source software.

Actually, it *should*.  Our community needs to etch out a patent-free
space, and this is one way in which Apple has sought to implement that 

But even if you disagree with me, how would you change the DFSG so
that it agrees with you?  Because I see nothing in the DFSG which
keeps APSL code out of Debian.

 > Another example is the RealNetworks Public Source license, which
 > discriminates based on "personal use".

It's perfectly okay to give more freedoms to some people, as long as
everyone has the necessary freedoms.  The discrimination term was
added to the DFSG to ensure that there would be no licenses of the
form "Anyone is free to use this software except people working on
nuclear bombs."

-russ nelson              http://russnelson.com | You get prosperity when
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | the government does less,
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | not when the government
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | does something right.

Reply to: