[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> the new proposed A4 requires that the code-base permits > commercial distribution (given that "nonfree licenses" implies > the four freedoms) - but It is supposed to require free licenses for code and documentation, and anything else that is meant to be used to do a practical job. However, other files (for instance, licenses, statements of opinions, art) may have licenses that don't allow modification, such as CC-ND. So A4 should not apply to those files. A4-1 says that even those files must at least permit noncommercial redistribution of exact copies. > if "nonsharing licenses" only permit non-commercial distribution, > then the proposed A4-1 would allow non-commercial licenses in > the same code-base, which would taint the entire code-base from > being distributed commercially, as a whole I don't follow that reasoning. Maybe it's not clear to me what scenario you have in mind. A "nonsharing" license is one that prohibits even noncommercial redistribution of exact copies. If the copyright holder puts a copy in a publicly accessible repo, that gives people permission to download that repo; however, with a nonsharing license, they would not be allowed to redistribute copies to others after downloading it. -- Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org) Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
