OSD modification regarding what license can require of

Forrest J. Cavalier III mibsoft at mibsoftware.com
Fri Mar 15 05:34:31 UTC 2002

David Johnson wrote...
> On Wednesday 13 March 2002 10:40 pm, Forrest J. Cavalier III wrote:
> > I just want to point out that there is one license
> > already approved which has a "public performance"
> > clause like Bruce gave as an example..
> >
> > The OSI approved the APSL, with clauses 2.2c-d, which require
> > publication of sources upon "deployment."
> You don't have the APSL quite right. Clause 2.2d only applies to "Your 
> Deployed Modifications."

Of course.  The discussion was how to get modified
source code published when someone is operating as an ASP.
What part did I misunderstand?

> Clause 2.2d merely requires a prominent notice of the license for binary only 
> deployments. It can only be triggered by the creation of a derivative work, 
> since compilation is considered derivation.

You describe the triggering condition accurately enough.  But do you
really interpret that it "merely requires a ... notice"?  After all,
the APSL says the notice must include information about how and
where to obtain the modified source code which you deployed.

license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

More information about the License-discuss mailing list