Approval of IWL - Consolidated Response

[Chuck Swiger]

Hi, Gernot--

On Jun 11, 2008, at 2:39 AM, Gernot Heiser wrote:
>>> It seems to me that arguments are boiling down to OSD compliance not
>>> being sufficient.
>>>
> MF> On the contrary.  OSD compliance is key, and as I said, your  
> license
> MF> violates OSD #9.
>
> Ok, I'm happy to hear that OSD compliance is key.
>
> So it's down to an alleged violation of OSD #9. We have asked for that
> to be clarified, but I haven't seen anyone clearly enunciate how the
> IWL violates OSD #9.

Very well; OSD #9 reads:

"9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is  
distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license  
must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium  
must be open-source software."

IWL clause 1.(c)(ii) states:

   (c) Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on
       how to obtain complete source code for:

       (i) the Software; and
       (ii) all accompanying software that uses (or is intended to  
use) the
            Software whether directly or indirectly.

An OSD-compliant license is not allowed to place restrictions on other  
software which merely uses your software...in this case, by requiring  
the complete source code for the other software.  For what it's worth,  
most of the draft versions of the GPLv3 would not have been OSD #9- 
compliant, either.

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck