[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.

Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> * Licenses like the GPL or BSDPL, which allow modifiers to distribute
>   their changes only under that same license, are Free.  That is,
>   compelling a copyleft is OK.  Compelling a non-copyleft (BSDPL) is
>   also OK, if weird.  It's just forcing me to give the same freedoms
>   and restrictions I had.


> * Uneven licenses, which have multiple distinct free paths, are Free
>   as long as there is one Free path.  That is, "BSD to teachers, GPL
>   to everyone else" is OK.  If I'm a teacher, I have a free license
>   and can distribute my changes under any license I like, including
>   the BSD.  If I'm not, I have a Free license, the GPL, and can
>   distribute my changes under the GPL, the same license I received.


> * Licenses like the QPL, which compel me to give somebody more rights
>   to my work than I had to his, are not Free.  They are not compatible
>   with DFSG 3.

I strongly feel that if the previous case is Free, this one should be as
well.  The only difference in rights is that fewer people can take the
work proprietary; I consider this an improvement.  It is still not
ideal, because ideally no one should be able to take the software
proprietary, but it is better than the previous case.

> * Uneven licenses which compel a non-copyleft license grant are also
>   not Free.  For example, a license which said "this is BSD to
>   teachers, GPL to everybody else, EXCEPT that you must also make your
>   work BSD to teachers" is not free.  I didn't have the right to make
>   proprietary changes, so compelling me to grant that right to others
>   is non-Free.

I don't see how this follows from the DFSG.  (That doesn't mean it
should be allowed, G being for Guidelines, but you did say these points
were grounded in the DFSG.)  Suppose all the conditions are written into
one license, which says "everyone may use/copy/modify/distribute under
this license; if you are a teacher, you may use/copy/modify/distribute
under the BSD license".  This would not fail DFSG3, because you have the
right to distribute under the same license.  Some people happen to get
additional rights under that license.

- Josh Triplett

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: