[License-review] OSD #9 would not make SSPL OSD-incompliant

[Josh Berkus]

On 10/24/2018 12:26 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> This is the reason why the FSF has been careful to define GPL licenses as
> not applying on mere use, since that's a minefield and will definitely lead
> to license ragnarok.
> 
> The term "mere use" is nowhere defined. In our conversations, we frequently
> confuse the legal constructs of "agency" and "subcontracting" and "scope of
> control." Does the U.S. government get one license for "mere use" or do the
> Army and Navy independently require GPL "mere use" exceptions? Is there a
> difference between a conglomerate like Alphabet and a startup in a Silicon
> Valley garage that is subsequently acquired? 

None of your arguments are making any sense here.  Wanna try again?


-- 
Josh Berkus