Re: Bug#227159: ocaml: Worse, the QPL is not DFSG-free

[Brian Thomas Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu>]

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:

>> The QPL versions are fees because they are paid to the initial
>> developer when I distribute to some third party.
>
> DFSG #1 does not talk about who receives the fee.  If the license
> required to pay $1 to the receiver of each copy, this would clearly be
> a fee and a violation of that clause, but the original author would
> not benefit from it.

This is true.  I phrased my earlier statement very poorly.

>> The Free copyleft equivalents are not fees, merely limited grants of
>> permission to distribute.
>
> And the QPL requirements are not fees either, they merely limit the
> grants of permission to modify?

Fortunately, this part is the core, and I was correct.  The QPL
requirements are not limitations on modification -- they are
requirements that if I modify in certain ways, I *must* then
distribute and grant licenses.  So my argument does not work both
ways.

-Brian

> As you can see, your argument works both ways. 8-)
>
> (I'm not sure if the QPL pass all the other DFSG clauses, though.)

-- 
Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu