faq

[David Woolley]

Jesus Omar Duran Villan wrote:
> 
> 2009/5/28 Jesus Omar Duran Villan <joduranvillan at misena.edu.co 
> <mailto:joduranvillan at misena.edu.co>>
> 
>     My license required to send the original author of the software
>     source code of any modifications is a Open Source license?

I seem to be missing the start of this thread.

I can't remember if such licences are within the OSD, but they are 
disliked, as too onerous, by the open source community.

Any licence that required such changes to be assigned to the original 
author would definitely not be open source.  I doubt that any licence 
that required them to be licenced back with any more rights than the 
modifier received would be considered open source.  One that required 
the same licence would be very onerous, as every modifier would have to 
send to every other modifier if they took advantge of the contributions.
> 
> 


-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.