MJ Ray wrote: >It was suggested to me that compelled contribution of copyrightable >work to the upstream would probably be classed as consideration in >England, although I've not been able to verify that. The suggestor is >not a lawyer, but has studied contract law for another qualification, >which is more than I have.
It's possible that there are certain narrow conditions involving fun legal definitions under which the compelled contribution of copyrightable code might be considered a fee. But the DFSG isn't a legal document, so we're free to interpret it how we want. I'm certainly strongly inclined to believe that "fee" in DFSG 1 is referring to money. If there's any evidence that it was framed to the contrary, I'd be fascinated. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
