Re: LPPL and non-discrimination
Jonathan Fine <firstname.lastname@example.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 <email@example.com>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03