new licensing model
rick at linuxmafia.com
Mon Dec 19 03:13:22 UTC 2005
Quoting Nikolai (n_k at au.ru):
[regardling OSI being the custodian of the Open Source Definition:]
> Sounds like someone holds a monopoly on what open source is. If so, who
> is monopolist?
Table-pounding rhetoric will not change the fact that you've proposed
to abuse the term to mean something antithetical to its definition.
I hope you don't think you're the first to think of that tactic: Quite
a number have tried it. Most were much smoother than you. And the answer
has generally been polite, but has invariably been "no".
So: Your "new licensing model" is yet another proprietary shareware thing,
and not open source. Deal. Have a great day, be happy, make lots of
money -- but, sorry, Nikolai, it's just not open source. Bye!
Rick Moen "Anger makes dull men witty, but it keeps them poor."
rick at linuxmafia.com -- Elizabeth Tudor
More information about the License-discuss