OSL Version 1.0 dated 8/2/2002

[John Cowan]

Lawrence E. Rosen scripsit:

> Please note that I am not particularly worried about people merely
> *using* the software in an external deployment fashion.  The real
> objective is to capture derivative works through a reciprocity
> obligation.

In that case I think you should make use of market forces rather than
legal coercion (though I am far from being an L&E guy in general).  Experience
shows that unless a patch is truly the whole foundation of someone's business
(unlikely), that the internal patch maintainer would much rather pass the
patch upstream to you (thus sharing it), rather than having to figure out
how to integrate the patch in each new release you send out.  Certainly
this has been my experience at both ends of the pipeline, and others have
reported it too.

-- 
Not to perambulate              || John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth.com>
    the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose      || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3