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

Re: Open Software License v2.1



On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 08:20:58AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Andrew Suffield writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 10:38:51AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> > > Andrew Suffield writes:
> > > 
> > > > On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 09:41:05AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> > > > > The former is objectionable -- and I think not free -- because the
> > > > > author's alleged patent infringement need not be related to the
> > > > > software.  I am not sure why some people think the latter is
> > > > > objectionable, since it is similar in spirit and effect to the GPL's
> > > > > termination case
> > > > 
> > > > I am not sure why some people think the latter is acceptable, since it
> > > > is similar in spirit and effect to the MS EULA (which says that you
> > > > can't do anything the copyright holder doesn't like).
> > > 
> > > This is not true, and it does not approximate anything that is true.
> > 
> > False. Go and read the MS EULA.
> 
> You write as if there were only one.

They're all mostly the same.

> > > > Free software licenses give things to the licensee. Not the copyright
> > > > holder.
> > > 
> > > Under this line of argument, the GPL is non-free because it gives the
> > > copyright holder a promise that the licensee will redistribute the
> > > work (in original or modified form) in source code to anyone the
> > > licensee gives a copy to.
> > 
> > Also wrong, despite attempts at word games. The GPL gives all
> > licensees access to the source, and nothing to the copyright holder
> > (unless they coincidentally happen to be a licensee of a modified
> > version). This is a necessary condition for it to be free; if it
> > actually gave access to the source to the copyright holder then it
> > would not be free. An example of a non-free license along these lines
> > is the old NPL.
> 
> You have yet to establish why this argument applies to the kind of
> patent lawsuit clause in the Open Software License, since it protects
> all licensees equally.

You have yet to establish what your argument has got to do with the
price of tea in China.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: