For Approval: Open Source Software Alliance License

Sean Chittenden sean at
Sat Sep 27 06:59:46 UTC 2003

> >>>The GPL interferes with the creation of proprietary software.
> >>
> >>Correct, which is what I object to and why I created the OSSAL.
> >>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.
> >
> >That's really perverse, Sean.  Pretend that the GPL is a
> >proprietary license for software distributed by the FSF.  Let's say
> >that this business (the FSF) takes a piece of BSD-licensed
> >software, makes even a trivial modification, and licenses it under
> >their proprietary license (the GPL).  The software leaves the realm
> >of software modifiable by you, or anyone else who wants to make
> >proprietary changes.  You say this is bad, but it's exactly the
> >same thing that happens when any other company does the same thing.
> >Why do you want your license to discriminate against the FSF?
> It sounds to me like Sean really wants to avoid the emergence of a
> alternative, viable Open Source fork of his project under the
> GPL. That is, he is less concerned about what happens to the code
> per se, and more concerned about the -community- being split by
> having two interesting public code bases under different licenses.
> Particularly if the interesting stuff starts happening under a GPL
> license, and ends up obsoleting the original (BSD) codebase.
> Is that correct, Sean?

Eh, it's _a_ concern, but my bigger concern is in keeping code usable
to widget manufacturers no matter what.


Sean Chittenden
license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list