IPL as a burden

kmself at ix.netcom.com kmself at ix.netcom.com
Thu Jan 18 10:19:33 UTC 2001

on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:17:41AM -0800, Frank LaMonica (frankl at valinux.com) wrote:
> Gregor,

> I like the terminology you used: "source included software (SIS)".
> SIS would be much better than a closed source, proprietary
> alternative, but I don't see any incentive for open source programmers
> to contribute to such a program.  

As has been noted severally,  source availability covers a spectrum,
probably best described as multidimensional.

    There are terms which *require* permanent availability of sources
    -- RMS applies the term "Copyleft" to such licenses.  GNU GPL is
    an example.

    There are terms which require permanent availability but limit the
    scope of coverage in derived works:  LGPL, MozPL, etc.

    There are terms which provide for source distribution and
    modification, but which *don't* require any such availability in
    derived works: BSD/MIT, etc.

    Yadda, but original author maintains certain controls:  Some of
    Apple's licenses, SCSL, Netscap Public License.

    Academic or similar licensing arrangements (Sun, w/ Solaris, IIRC).

    NDA arrangements.

    Employment arrangements.

    Code escrow.


There is a continuum of source availability.  At various points in the
continuum, you'll find various amounts of participation, given
sufficient reasons, or, as the expression goes, reasons per hour.

This continuum is illustrated by Bob Young in his book _Under the
Radar_, and by Don Rosenberg in _Open Source: The Unauthorized White
Papers_, with a handy diagram, even. 

See also:



Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>    http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?       There is no K5 cabal
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/         http://www.kuro5hin.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20010118/51b5abee/attachment.sig>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list