Re: LPPL and non-discrimination
Glenn Maynard <email@example.com> writes:
> 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.
Yeah, a viral anti-copyleft license -- that would be odd. But
probably not non-free, you're right. But that's not really the same
as requiring that a particular group be able to relicense your code
however they like.
Jeremy Hankins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03