On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 08:55:34AM -0400, Chris wrote: > @Michael: My first line was a clear warning so I definitely wasn't > trying to foment licensing chaos. :) I was going to write on the next > line, "I believe, in general...". Rapid editing killed the "I believe" > part. All apologies. > > One thing I'm not confused about is the Copyright Act. Section 117 > says, essentially, that once you buy software, you are a copy owner. > The closed licensing concept comes from companies trying to get around > the fact that people own their software like they own their books. > > So I guess it comes down to this: > > I want to provide the source upon request. > I want to allow developers to alter the source as they see fit. > I want developers to seek permission to redistribute under another license. > > That makes BSD too permissive and LGPL too restrictive.
Sounds like LGPL would be just fine for your aims. Why do you feel it is too restrictive for your goals? --- James Paige
