MPL 2 section 11

[Wilson, Andrew]

Bruce Perens wrote:

> Adding permissions to use under different licenses is always the right
> of the copyright holder, and can be stated /outside of the Mozilla
> license./ And IMO should be.
>
> As it stands, this is just another way that MPL has made itself into a
> meta-license. There will be little point in saying something is "MPL 2"
> because of the infinite number of appedici which can be added to modify
> the license.
>
> And there's also modification of the body text. How many OSI-approved
> licenses are MPL variants? It seems more than any other sort.
>
> I submit that Mozilla would be doing the community a service if they
> were to make their license invariant.

Bruce, I think this a little harsh (at least with respect to Ex. A
additional permissions -- changes to the body text are different).

May I suggest the MPL draft could changed so that all Ex. A permissions
may be removed by a recipient if so desired?  I am thinking of how additional permissions
are handled in GPLv3.  Since GPLv3 permissions may be stripped, you always
have core GPLv3 as a common denominator.

Andy Wilson
Intel open source technology center