Are implicit dual-licensing agreements inherently anti-open?

[Alex Bligh]

--On 22 July 2005 15:40 -0700 Michael Bernstein <webmaven at cox.net> wrote:

> flock to a license
> like the OVPL precisely because the loophole is there,

I think characterizing it as a loophole is a bit unfair. A loophole
normally means some piece of obscure drafting that can be exploited. We've
highlighted it in 10 foot high red flashing neon letters. The contributor
(and that's who we are talking about here) gets to decide whether to
contribute, under the terms of the license. If they don't like it, they
will presumably work on some other project. That was my point about
license-model competition.

Alex