why MPL is hard for other companies to adopt? (was RE: Open Source Business Found Parasitic, and the ADCL)

[John Cowan]

James Harrell scripsit:

> The obvious major issue, is now that another commercial entity (Netscape)
> has the authority to subvert the license. Not that they would, but they
> could. Not having this section templated (ie: Insert company name here)
> is a show stopper. Am I missing something?

If you templated the MPL in this respect and called it the Commercial
Open Source License, I suspect it would get past this list and be
passed by OSI.  (Warning: OSI are a bunch of volunteers and they
take time to approve things, even obvious things.)

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan at ccil.org
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
        --_The Hobbit_
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3