G'day all.
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 12:18:29 -0500, John Cowan wrote:
[no modification allowed in the context of language bindings in standards]
> > Is Java code that binds such standard interfaces inherently unfree?
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 06:12:45PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> Such a license is not OSD-compliant.
> > Does it violate the OSD, specifically clauses 3 and 4?
> Yes. Clause 4 hints at a mechanism that can be used to make the interface
> free in this case: require that modified versions are clearly marked as such
> (in the context of standards: explicitly mention they don't conform to the
> standard).
In the case of Java, it might work to add the requirement that the
class(es) must be placed under a different package name. I think that
might give the desired effect, of discouraging modification while still
allowing it if someone downstream thought the cost was worth the hassle.
Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
