OSD Model Code -- Article 1 (Free Distribution)

[Rod Dixon]

The Artistic license v. 2.0 has been proposed and a copy is at
dev.perl.org/rfc/346.html As you will note, clause 5 has been revised.
Consequently, I do not see an issue here. I am assuming that once proposed
changes to the OSD are presented some of the current license templates may
not be in compliance, but this is a forward-looking process.

Rod


On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Forrest J. Cavalier III wrote:

> > From:          "Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <rdixon at cyberspaces.org>
> > To:            "Forrest J. Cavalier III" <mibsoft at mibsoftware.com>,
> >                <license-discuss at opensource.org>
> > Subject:       Re: OSD Model Code -- Article 1 (Free Distribution)
>
> > Do you mean clause 5 of version 2.0 of the Artistic License? If so, would
> > you agree that the proposed change, either your suggestion or Larry's, would
> > avoid the problem caused by the current Art. 1 of the OSD or do you think
> > there is still a problem with clause 5?
> >
>
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license.php
> clause #5 reads:
>    5. You may charge a reasonable copying fee for any distribution of
>    this Package. You may charge any fee you choose for support of this
>    Package. You may not charge a fee for this Package itself. However,
>    you may distribute this Package in aggregate with other (possibly
>    commercial) programs as part of a larger (possibly commercial)
>    software distribution provided that you do not advertise this Package
>    as a product of your own.
>
>
> --
> license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
>

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