On 6/28/19 11:40 PM, Bruce Perens via License-discuss wrote: > > 2. _At what point the licensor can oblige licensee behavior_. > The trigger for meeting license obligations can differ across > licenses. The most common, almost universal trigger, is > distribution of software. The AGPL license triggers upon allowing > network interaction with modified software. The > CAL license implements a new trigger, which is the obligation to > make unmodified software available to anyone interacting with an > interface for the software. In other words, someone might install > a program that allows for interaction with the website (perhaps > providing a webform to sign up for a newsletter) and would now be > obliged to make the source code available to any person who filled > out the > webform. > http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004113.html > > <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-May/004113.html> > The License Review > Committee does not believe that there has been adequate airing of > this issue from a variety of viewpoints on the license-review > discussion about this aspect of the license, so has not reached a > conclusion about at what point imposing license obligations is > appropriate. > > > I'm not sure I agree with the committee here, this is the public > performance issue and a /synthetic /public performance right exists in > an accepted license. >
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
