Are implicit dual-licensing agreements inherently anti-open?

[Wilson, Andrew]

David Barrett wrote: 

> However, can *only* the ID request them?  For example, if you are the 
> ID, and Bob makes some semi-private (ie, selectively distributed) 
> modifications, can I -- as just an ordinary contributor -- request
Bob's 
> modified source code?
>
> I would think that in the spirit of openness, anyone should be able to

> request them (thus the ID needn't be the sole protector of open 
> redistribution of contributor modifications).

I'd hope that as a matter of playing nicely with the community, a
developer who's published code under any sort of open source license
would fulfill a request for source.  However, in terms of what licenses
mandate that you *must* do, as opposed to *should* do, current
reciprocal
licenses aren't nearly so broad.  GPL obliges you only to furnish
modifications
to people downstream from you in the distribution chain, or offer to
furnish modifications to them for three years, and doesn't oblige you
to make source available to anyone else.  In the case where you modify
code and do not distribute to outside parties, GPL 2.0 does not obligate
you to share modifications at all.

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center