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

Re: LPPL and non-discrimination

Jonathan Fine <jfine@activetex.org> writes:
> Jeremy Hankins wrote:

>> Must modifications be under the ABC-DFL?  If so, it's non-free
>> because to modify it you must agree that ABC can use your code in
>> their proprietary stuff.  Is this what you're getting at?
> Spot on.  Exactly the point.

Ok.  It's important to distinguish such a license, then, from one
which allows you to relicense derivative works as GPL, say.  Such a
license wouldn't have this problem.  Of course, such a license would
essentially be a needlessly complicated and confusing GPL.

> Consider ABC-GPL, as defined above.  You are, under such a license,
> allowed to produce a derived work.  This is because the GPL allows
> you to produce a derived work.

Only if you agree with their restriction -- namely to permit them to
take your changes proprietary.  Not substantially different from being
able to produce a derived work if you pay them lots of $.

> Are you saying that an ABC-DFL license is not free?

No, it wouldn't be free.

> If so, under which of the Debian guidelines?

It's not freely modifiable.  Discrimination doesn't enter into it.

Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333  9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03

Reply to: