Gerfried Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-02 18:46]: >> On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 02:02:50PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: >>> Isn't Section 10 of the OSL ("Mutual Termination for Patent Action") a >>> violation of Section 5 of the DFSG ("No Discrimination Against Persons >>> or Groups")? It clearly discriminates persons filing a law suite >>> against a OSL licensed software. >> >> This sort of rationale is usually bogus. >> >> In its ultimate form, the MIT/X11 license is "non-free" because it >> discriminates against people trying to sell the software. > > Thats one of the reason why we put software that is "for non-commercial > use only" into non-free. Your point was?
You appear confused: "for non-commercial use" does not restrict the distribution, but rather the use of the software. For example, if I had a copy of Emacs with a license "for non-commercial use only," I could not use it to write programs for pay. Those licenses discriminate against a field of endeavor (actually against all commercial fields of endeavor). -Brian -- Brian T. Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.evenmere.org/~bts/