Jonathan Fine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jeremy Hankins wrote: >> Must modifications be under the ABC-DFL? If so, it's non-free >> because to modify it you must agree that ABC can use your code in >> their proprietary stuff. Is this what you're getting at? > > Spot on. Exactly the point.
Ok. It's important to distinguish such a license, then, from one which allows you to relicense derivative works as GPL, say. Such a license wouldn't have this problem. Of course, such a license would essentially be a needlessly complicated and confusing GPL. > Consider ABC-GPL, as defined above. You are, under such a license, > allowed to produce a derived work. This is because the GPL allows > you to produce a derived work. Only if you agree with their restriction -- namely to permit them to take your changes proprietary. Not substantially different from being able to produce a derived work if you pay them lots of $. > Are you saying that an ABC-DFL license is not free? No, it wouldn't be free. > If so, under which of the Debian guidelines? It's not freely modifiable. Discrimination doesn't enter into it. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
