Draft 1 of the OpenDesk.com Public Source License

[Wilfredo Sanchez]

| You could use the LGPL and protect "commercial work" just as well,  
while
| promoting the development of free applications.

  Using the LGPL is effectively dual-licensing, so it doesn't  
address the issue; it's merely biases it in your favor as a GPL  
advocate.

  You might argue the GPL is good because it prevents someone from  
relicensing your code in a way that makes derivatives no longer  
useful to you (no longer free).  But the LGPL is the same thing in  
reverse.  If a commercial business wants to make some part of its  
software open source and opts for the LGPL, then someone might make a  
derivatives no longer useful to the business.  I'm assuming, of  
course, that the GPL conflicts with some business interest, which is  
why the business isn't just using the GPL.

  So a GPL advocate says he doesn't want you making derivatives that  
are contrary to his needs, but if he's suggesting the LGPL, he's  
saying that he want to be able to pull that trick on you.  This is  
fair?

  Of course, RMS doesn't like the LGPL, so at least he's consistant.  
 But the fact the there is an LGPL despite RMS points directly at a  
flaw in the GPL.

  The trend here is obvious.  There is concern that the growing and  
varied licenses popping up may conflict.  This is a valid concern.   
Code sharing is in our best interest, and license conflicts are  
inhibitors to code sharing.  Bad stuff.  I'm not seeing all that many  
conflicts, except with the GPL.  This is a serious problem, and most  
of it centers around the GPL.

  I can write a program and use snippets of code from BSD and from  
Apple and from IBM and from Apache and it's all good.  It I keep each  
source compartmentalized, there is usually no problem.  If I mix  
them in up, there are ways to do that as well.  But if I want to add  
GNU code, then I start having intractable licensing conflicts.

  This dual licensing idea, GPL plus whatever other thing you like,  
is not the answer.  It's a workaround; and a hack at that.

	-Fred


--
       Wilfredo Sanchez, wsanchez at apple.com
Apple Computer, Inc., Core Operating Systems / BSD
          Technical Lead, Darwin Project
   1 Infinite Loop, 302-4K, Cupertino, CA 95014