brian at collab.net
Wed Apr 13 22:36:57 UTC 2005
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Michael R. Bernstein wrote:
> To me, there is a qualitative difference between an Initial Developer
> (ID) requiring copyright assignment (for which, if the ID is a business,
> they might even be willing to pay for) in order to roll a modification
> into the main release of a project and a license that pre-determines
> that such an assignment to the ID has already been made if the
> modification has been distributed.
That's a much more narrowly defined area to have an issue with than has
been bandied about so far in these discussions, or in OSI's proliferation
paper. The NPL had that; do other open source licenses? The Apache
License 2.0 has an implicit grant if you offer a derivative work back to
us; but not if you redistribute on your own.
I'm also siding with those who had more than a little dismay at the
attitude being shown to the MPL.
More information about the License-discuss