OSI compliance requiring software to be "free beer"?
ben_tilly at hotmail.com
Thu Jan 18 19:05:47 UTC 2001
1) You are seriously misrepresenting what was said.
2) It has been made very clear to you that you will not get
3) In all likelyhood you are charging someone money for the
time spent wasting our bandwidth. This is the most
likely explanation for your continued idiotic obstinance.
At this point you are wasting money and generating bad
feelings towards Intradat. You should stop and consider
whether continuing to damage your client's interests is
Manfred Schmid <mschmid at intradat.com> wrote:
>Dear Board Members:
>I follow up on the discussions on license-discuss at opensource.org
>concerning our IPL / Developer Program Model.
>We know, that up to now Open Source Software has been free both in the
>meaning of "free speech" and "free beer". We want to introduce a model
>that guarantees free speech but takes the free beer aspect away.
>Under certain conditions, IPL requires you to pay the prices according
>to our price list, if you want to use IPLed software.
>Within the discussion it turned out, that most participants argued, Open
>Source Software has to be free in the sense of "free beer", i.e.
>requiring the user to pay license fees will be a no-go for OSI approval.
>We have not found any such restriction being officially published.
>We do not want to change the definition of Open Source, nor do we want
>to correct GPL etc. For us, Open Source covers a continuum defined by
>freedom, competition and the availability, changeability and
>distribution of Source Code.
>We think, Open Source as a term should cover all the already OSI
>approved licenses (free source) as well as IPL like models.
>I hereby request an official Board statement: Does OSI approval of
>licenses require the software to be free in the sense of "free beer"?
>Wilhelm-Leuschner-Strasse 7 u. 9-11
>D - 60329 Frankfurt a. M., Germany
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
More information about the License-discuss