Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A license that says "modify and distribute all you want; keep my name; don't > add additional restrictions to the license" implicitly requires that you allow > your modifications to be used proprietarily, since it prevents you from adding > the GPL's safeguards against it. I'd find that license to be obnoxious (and > it'd be incompatible with most other licenses), but it doesn't seem non-free.
Yeah, a viral anti-copyleft license -- that would be odd. But probably not non-free, you're right. But that's not really the same as requiring that a particular group be able to relicense your code however they like. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
