For Approval: Open Source Software Alliance License

Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet galactus at
Thu Sep 25 18:15:30 UTC 2003

Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > > Businesses using OSSAL software would give the business the
> > > ability to create proprietary software, even though the non-core
> > > parts are most likely open and available to the public.
> > 
> > The same is true of software under the BSD license.
> Correct, but the BSD license does not ensure that all software
> developed will be available under terms friendly for businesses, which
> goes back to the point of me writing the OSSAL.

If someone takes BSD-licensed code, modifies it and does a
binary-only release, the modifications are not available at all.
So businesses cannot use these modifications.

If someone takes BSD-licensed code, modifies it and releases
the result under GPL, the modifications are available but with
certain restrictions. Now businesses cannot use the modifications
either (unless they accept the restrictions).

So I don't really see the difference here. In both cases the
modifications are not available without restriction. Why does 
it matter that in one case they are licensed under a 
restrictive license?


Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies:
license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list