Open Source Content License (OSCL) - Other/Miscellaneous licenses

Bruce Perens bruce at
Sat Apr 19 12:15:58 UTC 2008

John Cowan wrote:
> That's not the issue; it's obeying the GPL that's annoying within the
> constraints of conventional paper-and-ink publishing.  Both v2 and v3
> require the source code (HTML or DocBook or LaTeX or what have you) to
> be distributed "on a medium customarily used for software interchange",
> which nowadays means a CD or DVD.
Perhaps you are only considering one side of the equation. As a 
publisher, it is desirable, not annoying, that producers of derivative 
works are required to distribute the source for their derivative under 
terms that allow me to reproduce their contribution in my next edition. 
The medium for exchange is irrelevant, as everyone accepts the internet.



More information about the License-review mailing list