[License-review] Request for Approval : Modular Open-source Software License (MOSL)

[Bruce Perens]

I'm afraid you missed "The license shall not require a royalty or other 
fee for such sale" in the Open Source Definition.
It fine for a proprietary license, but there's no point in submitting it 
to this group.

We really like forks. Especially zero-price ones.

On 09/24/2012 10:46 PM, Hadrien Grasland wrote:
> that could be incompatible with my previously stated goals of letting 
> people sell software without allowing customers to take the source, 
> make a trivial fork of it, and sell it at a lower price.
...
> The source code must either be included in the distribution or be 
> available for no more than the cost of distribution. For an executable 
> file, complete source code means the source code for all modules it 
> contains. It does not include source code for modules or files that 
> typically accompany the major components of the operating system on 
> which the executable file runs.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bruce.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 266 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120924/1eb4fc92/attachment.vcf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4460 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120924/1eb4fc92/attachment.p7s>