Must publish vs. must supply

[David Johnson]

On Monday 10 March 2003 08:04 pm, Chris F Clark wrote:

> Actually, as I understand it a must-xxx clause is closer to the
> definition of free-software than to "open source".

So let me get this straight. Mandatory requirements included for 
pragmatic reasons are more aligned with Free Software than with Open 
Source? Don't you have your terms switched?

> ... it is disturbing and offensive to discover
> that the software is used "internally" by a corporation to proprietary
> advantage...

Since the FSF rejects the APSL as being non-free, for the reasons that 
it regulates how the software may be used internally via a 
"must-publish" clause, then I'm pretty sure that you've got your terms 
backwards.

> A must-xxx clause levels the playing field by eliminating this
> loophole.

Utilitarian pragmatism to its finest. Definitely Open Source.

p.s. As to where the "official" differences between the FSF/Debian and 
OSI are in regards to must-publish, I would say it depends heavily on 
the individual queried. I can find any number of pairs of opposite 
vocal viewpoints in both "communities".

Cheers,

-- 
David Johnson
___________________
http://www.usermode.org
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3