Why "open-source" means "free to distribute"?
Lawrence Rosen
lrosen at rosenlaw.com
Thu May 6 22:38:35 UTC 2004
> > What does OSL and ESL stands for?
>
> Enterprise Source License and OEM Source License.
>
> I am guessing these are Gluecode-invented names. I have no idea what
> licenses are behind those names. For all we know, OEM Source License
> may be a BSD license!
If those licenses are not approved by OSI, they may not use our
certification mark. We don't care what they "look like."
Lawrence Rosen
Rosenlaw & Einschlag, technology law offices
3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-485-1242 * fax: 707-485-1243
email: lrosen at rosenlaw.com
www.rosenlaw.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Rousskov [mailto:rousskov at measurement-factory.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 1:42 PM
> To: Guilherme C. Hazan
> Cc: license-discuss at opensource.org
> Subject: Re: Why "open-source" means "free to distribute"?
>
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2004, Guilherme C. Hazan wrote:
>
> > > The paragraphs you seem to be referring to are not licenses. They only
> > > refer to OSL and ESL licenses.
> >
> > What does OSL and ESL stands for?
>
> Enterprise Source License and OEM Source License.
>
> I am guessing these are Gluecode-invented names. I have no idea what
> licenses are behind those names. For all we know, OEM Source License
> may be a BSD license!
>
> Alex.
>
> --
> 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
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list