Free World Licence and clauses 5,6,8 & 9 of OSS definition.
arromdee at rahul.net
Tue Oct 19 03:49:27 UTC 1999
On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Ross N. Williams wrote:
> >> The FWL does not discriminate in relation to a PARTICULAR
> >> software distribution. Instead, it discriminates in relation
> >> to a CLASS of distributions - the free ones.
> >If it means what you say it means, what's to prevent someone from defining a
> >class consisting of "Windows 95 and all successor operating systems"?
> But your example is a class defined by an identity, not a property.
I'm not sure what you mean by an identity. If you mean that it defines its
class only by listing all its members, then no, it doesn't. It doesn't even
mention Windows 98, yet Windows 98 would be included in it.
And honestly, if _you_ saw the phrase "particular", would you really think it
meant "being a member of a class defined by an identity, but not a class
defined by a property"? That's just too long and convoluted a definition to
have plausibly been intended all along.
More information about the License-discuss