For Approval: Transitive Grace Period Public Licence, v1.0

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

>Chris Zumbrunn wrote:
>> No, because for the first twelve month the license behaves like a
>> permissive open source license.
>Actually, it doesn't. A permissive or "gift" Open Source license allows
>software under /other/ licenses, generally a proprietary license or "All
>Rights Reserved", to be combined with the Open Source component.

>In the case of software under the TGPPL, the restricted component is
>under the TGPPL, rather than another license. But that component is not
>Open Source until some time expires.

He means it acts like BSD code that has been used in a proprietary 
product.

Allowed to be proprietary, binary only for 12 months.

>Consider the situation of someone who acquires that software and
>redistributes it as if it were Open Source. That person would be subject
>to criminal prosecution under trade secrets law and civil suit for
>copyright infringement. Even though the TGPPL applied to the software in
>question.

Except that you can't acquire the source code until either 12 months expires
or they might explicitly release it earlier.  

Once source is available, it's open source like any other OSL code forever 
more (or 70 years + life of the author).

Before 12 months, it acts like BSD code that has been absorbed into a 
proprietary product.  What HAD already been released as source is 
still open source but any new code that has been added is still under that
12 month grace period.

>Thus, it is difficult for me to see how the TGPPL could be OSD compliant.

Once the source is available it is OSL.  But you can add your new proprietary 
code to it without needing to release that new code for 12 months.