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