allowing non-free use but limiting public performance

[John Cowan]

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?

The LGPL.
 
-- 

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)