Thanks for all the feedback folks. On Sat, Oct 20, 2018, 6:02 PM Kyle Mitchell <k...@kemitchell.com> wrote:
> On 2018-10-20 09:10, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Peter Corless: > > > > > There seems to be a lot of buzz these days about licenses in the face > of > > > cloud providers. > > > > > > I'd like to ask if anyone has considered, in this group, the concept > of a > > > 'channelized' license? > > > > > > Party A: An OSS developer. > > > Party B: A cloud provider who hosting Party A's OSS, and is is charging > > > Party C for this. > > > Party C: A user, using Party A's software, which is hosted on Party > B's > > > cloud. > > > > > > Under current licensing, the OSS license is between Party A, and Party > B. > > > Party B really isn't modifying or contributing to Party A's OSS code > base. > > > > > > Party C, meanwhile, can do whatever they want to the OSS, since they > have > > > no legal license obligation back to Party A. Their access is provided > > > through Party B. They could, theoretically, violate the license Party A > > > distributed their software under, since they are just using it. > > > > By definition, OSS licenses do not have a field-of-use restriction, so > > it is impossible to violate the license just by using the software > > (unless the act of running the software creates some for of derivative > > work). Acts other than running the software typically require some > > sort of license under copyright, and C can only get that on A's terms > > (potentially as amended by B, but whether that's possible is really up > > to A). > > The language of OSD 6: > > The license must not restrict anyone from making use of > the program in a specific field of endeavor. > > The OSI has approved licenses that trigger copyleft > conditions on kinds of use, alone (OSL) and with > modifications (AGPL). > > OSL and AGPL licensees remain free to use the software for > the endeavors of business, the military, genetic research, > and so on. To use open licensing lingo, they aren't > _restricted_ from using in those fields. But when doing so > involves offering a network service, they have to mind and > comply with the conditions such use may trigger. > > -- > Kyle Mitchell, attorney // Oakland // (510) 712 - 0933 >
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
