Fwd: Re: Updated license - please comment

[Chuck Swiger]

[ ...I haven't seen this message appear on the list; resend... ]

Mark Rafn wrote:
> It may not be pertinent to the licensor's need.  I very much hope it is 
> pertinent to OSI's need to restrict use of it's service mark only to 
> software which can be freely modified.

Does OSD #3 mean that "The license must allow [ALL] modifications and derived
works, ...", without any restrictions?  If the OSD should be interpreted to
mandate that a compliant license may not forbid deliberately broken or malicious
redistributions, then my frank opinion is that the OSD should be changed.

-- 
-Chuck

PS: Yes, I'm repeating myself, but this is an important point that deserves
clarification.  Besides, I'm still waiting for the OSI board's response to the
ENRL.  Circa 2003-5-29, Russell Nelson told me that the board was meeting to
review last month's proposed licenses, and that he would recommend against
approval, but I haven't heard anything since.

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3