Are implicit dual-licensing agreements inherently anti-open?
Michael Bernstein
webmaven at cox.net
Tue Jul 19 23:12:07 UTC 2005
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 18:20 -0400, Mark Shewmaker wrote:
>
> Interestingly enough, while OSD #1 specifically precludes a required
> royalty or fee for the sale (or distribution) of Open Source Software,
> OSD #3 doesn't specifically preclude a required royalty or fee for
> modification of Open Source software.
Ouch. Sounds like a bug.
- Michael Bernstein
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list