Re: Summary : ocaml, QPL and the DFSG.
Josh Triplett <josh.trip@verizon.net> wrote:
> Edmund Grimley-Evans wrote:
> > I was thinking of a case where the software is being used in a
> > secretive industry. For example, suppose I work for a semiconductor
> > company with 500-100 employees. A lot of what we do is temporarily
> > confidential, in that we don't want the rest of the world finding out
> > what we are working on until there is an official announcement. We use
> > free software. We even use ML in some projects, though I personally
> > use Haskell. Sometimes we might want to distribute software that uses
> > a free library to selected partners, with whom carefully drafted
> > non-disclosure agreements have been signed. I can't imagine the legal
> > department accepting anything like 6c.
>
> Whoa, back up a minute. That's not even close to acceptable, and it's
> not something the GPL would allow either. If the software you are
> distributing is copylefted, all those you distribute the software to
> must have all the same Freedoms to that Free Software, which precludes
> the possibility of an NDA.
The QPL won't even allow something like a gentlemen's agreement. If
the agreement is broken, then the industry partner won't be getting
any more technology previews. This is fine with the GPL.
Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu
Reply to: