Quoting James Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > . . .
(I agree with everything.) > Perhaps what these commercial entities are seeking is a way to publish > an open source product that: > 1) Protects the commercial investment in developing > the intellectual property of the company > 2) Provides significant source contributions to the world And more. > So what we're really looking for is a license called "Partially Open > Source" or "Commercial Open Source" that will allow a company to > protect small portions of a larger product. In other words (pick a > number) X% of the product is truly Open Source, while Y% of the > product is not. Maybe 90/10, who knows. Actually we want 100% the software to be "quasi open source". > But the key here, is that > the commercial world does "want in" to the Open Source community, > and we're looking for some form of viable comprimise that will let > us work together and be embraced by (or in) the OSD. Absolutely. > Though I certainly understand this concept may be well outside of > the charter of your organization. Thus, I would be happy to offer > to begin to charter an organization for Commercial Open Source. I > would prefer not to do so, particularly if OSI is interested in > working towards incorporating and accepting such a concept into > the OSD. But if there is zero interest here in a Partial Open Source > license, then I believe that ultimately the commercial world will > form a consortium to address this concept. Yes, that is what I'm trying to do with a couple of other developers (in a paralel but independent email discussion). When we have an official Internet presence I'll take the liberty of announcing it here. In the meanwhile everybody is *very* welcome to the join the gang. Just let me know. Cheers, --MAA ----------------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through NIAAD: http://www.niaad.liacc.up.pt/ -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
