On Wednesday 12 March 2003 01:34 pm, Abe Kornelis wrote (editted silight by me in []:
> I'll stress my point one last time (you're bored stiff > already, I don't doubt) I would offer the recipients of my software > three choices: > 1) make no modifications. > 2) make mods and keep them private [under what conditions?] > 3) make mods and publish to the public, either by > [3a.] publishing yourself > or by > [3b.] passing a copy of the modifications to me. Obviously, item 2 must be under some restrictions, or there isn't any "must" in your 3. My feeling is that a license that allows only 1, 3a, and 3b is still open source (since the choice of 3a/3b) keeps the must restriction on musy-supply/must-public from being too onerous (well, that actually depends on how 3a and 3b "can" be acceptably accomplished under the license). I know that some/many people might object to a license that allows only 1 & 3, and it would not be a free license. Still, I do think it matches a model of sharing. It simply puts the point of where you have violated the author's copyrights at a different point (and that point matches my mental model). Moreover, I have no qualms that it prevents Chinese dissidents (or Al Queda memebers or whomever) from making private derived works. That is the intent. (Not specifically to penalize them, but to prevent others who can currently legally make private derived works of open source software form doing so with my software.) If doing something is illegal (or otherwise problematic) for someone, I have no desire to enable them to do it, by using a license that allows them to do it in private (since that right of privacy can be abused by others who I do not wish to have it). I would be saddened to find out, that I was required to give them that right of privacy to consider the license open source (as I might not then be able to distribute my software as open source). -Chris Clark One personal aside: I have been greatly pleased that the participants in this debate have chosen to try to consider the merits of each point soberly and with a minimum of inflammatory rhetoric. I understand that many of these points are volatile and could easily produce more heat than light Thank you. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
