allowing non-free use but limiting public performance
jcowan at reutershealth.com
Wed Feb 23 18:50:38 UTC 2000
Justin Wells wrote:
> Maybe all is not lost. I can put a controversial statement like this in:
> In addition, there is no right of public performance granted to
> such non-free derived works.
> This stops running the non-free derived work on a public application
> server. It doesn't stop people from running it in their own CORBA server
> and linking to it--but maybe that route is closer to derivation.
Nobody knows what "public performance" means in case of a program;
you are on very shaky ground legally.
> It also hurts. You can't run the non-free work on a public webserver. You
> can only use it on a private server, an internal network, etc.
It could be interpreted to mean
that such a program cannot be used on a publicly available workstation,
such as one in a library or @-cafe.
> -- Can a statement like this live in an opensource license?
It doesn't seem to violate the letter or the spirit of the OSD.
> -- Can you think of another way to do what I want? Namely, to restrict
> peoples ability to fork the code, other than via the free license?
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies! || John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth.com>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
More information about the License-discuss