From: Arnaud Quette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
We (MGE UPS SYSTEMS) would like to release some code under GPL with exception (file header at the end of this mail), and we need to have confirmation about some points to do things cleanly and surely:
1) As the GPL is an OSI-approved license, is the GPL with MGE exception, that we proposed hereafter, an OSI approved license too ? Or do we have to get an OSI approval for it ?
Normally, superficial changes (changing names, dates, etc) that do not affect the actual terms of the license and the way it works do not require a separate approval. This does not qualify as a superficial change in my book. However, you may wish to consult with someone from the OSI for a confirmation on this as I am not a representative of them.
2) Is the below header sufficient for inclusion in the distributed files, or do we need to attach a full GPL license file with those ?
This is sufficient as per what the FSF states is required for the GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html), provided that the full license is included in a plain-text document along with the distribution.
4) We also want to be sure that we can still extend this exception in the future, on the same released files, in example for allowing a partner to include this files in its proprietary program. Is this possible ?
As it stands now, the text appears to grant "MGE UPS SYSTEMS" the ability to use the code in your proprietary softwares, including changes, without being subject to the terms and conditions of the GPL (whether this is actually the case or not is a question for a legal expert).
Assuming this is correct, then anyone who is not "MGE UPS SYSTEMS" cannot do this, regardless of the circumstances, as they are not granted an exception. There are two ways around this issue:
1) Change the text to say "MGE UPS SYSTEMS or its partners" so that the exception applies to the parters of "MGE UPS SYSTEMS", or
2) When releasing new versions of the software, update the license to grant the exception to additional entities. Anyone who disagrees will therefore not be accepting the terms of the license and will not get rights to redistribute, modify, or create derivative works of the software.
Now, neither of these approaches violates the OSD as I understand it, but it is obviously against the spirit of open-source software. Further, authors that are a part of GNU or authors that advocate the GPL will not advocate your product, and will likely refuse to use or work on it, on the basis of your license changes and the fact that their changes could be used in proprietary products. You may wish to consider this.
I have not answered your question 3) as I would not be comfortable in giving you any advice on that issue, not being a legal expert.
Cheers, Nathan.
-- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
