Are implicit dual-licensing agreements inherently anti-open?

[Alex Bligh]

--On 12 July 2005 21:22 -0700 David Barrett <dbarrett at quinthar.com> wrote:

> Is it fundamentally "not open" to license source code in such a fashion
> that the initial developer has the additional right to relicense the code
> and all modifications under any license of his choosing, at any future
> date?

No - not by my reading of the OSI criteria, nor given the fact the QPL
is approved.

However, it's certainly not right for some projects, and is distasteful
to some (obviously not, me).

Alex