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