Re: LPPL and non-discrimination
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 12:28:12PM -0400, 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?
> > What about a license like the GPL, without the source distribution requirement?
> How is this different from a MIT/BSD license? The license is free,
> but as distributed (e.g., w/o source) it may not be.
A license that says "modify and distribute all you want; keep my name; don't
add additional restrictions to the license" implicitly requires that you allow
your modifications to be used proprietarily, since it prevents you from adding
the GPL's safeguards against it. I'd find that license to be obnoxious (and
it'd be incompatible with most other licenses), but it doesn't seem non-free.