OVPL and open ownership
Chris Zumbrunn
chris at czv.com
Mon Jul 25 08:54:57 UTC 2005
On Jul 25, 2005, at 10:16 AM, David Barrett wrote:
> At worst, a contributor can choose not to grant 3.3 to the ID for any
> code he submits
I believe that is what is unacceptable to David Ryan and Alex.
> And I want to confirm that 3.3 is not a convenience; it's the sole
> value of the OVPL. My whole intent is to ensure that *more* code is
> covered by 3.3 by making it the default submission license. Indeed,
> my concern with the BSD proposal is that it *guarantees* all
> contributions will *not* covered by 3.3 -- a step in exactly the wrong
> direction.
You are misunderstanding this. If a contributor can opt-out of 3.3 then
you will not be able to use his contribution in your proprietary
version. If a contributor has to contribute under a BSD-style license
then you can.
> Have I made this point clear? If so (or if not), can you detail
> precisely why you believe my proposal does a worse job protecting the
> ID's privilege than licensing under BSD? Can you give a concrete
> example under which it would be preferable to the ID to obtain
> contributions under a BSD license, versus under OVPL (with or without
> 3.3)?
See above :-)
Chris
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list