binary restrictions?

John Cowan cowan at
Wed Oct 3 02:48:26 UTC 2001

Karsten M. Self scripsit:

> It's not clear whether or not condition 1 implies that all
> modifications and derived works must be freely distributable, 

The MIT and BSD licenses make no such demand.  GPL != Open Source.

> > Anyone could redistribute
> > the "official" source (but *not* modified source).  
>                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> This expressly violates condition 3.

Not.  Licenses that only permit patch distribution can be Open Source.

John Cowan               cowan at
Please leave your values        |       Check your assumptions.  In fact,
   at the front desk.           |          check your assumptions at the door.
     --sign in Paris hotel      |            --Miles Vorkosigan
license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list