> I’m wondering if this license is OSD compliant by accident. I think it is, yes. It is not motivated by the OSD but seems to comply only an afterthought after having read the OSI's OSD definition. > Meaning: I don’t see how this license (as written) prevents employees > at a Big Company from using the code to build software that provides > profit to the shareholders. It ALLOWS employees at Big Company from using the code to build software, but it DISALLOWS Big Company from using the work the employees have done building the codebase. > As explained explicitly, any group of people can use code licensed > under Leftcopy for any endeavor. A team of engineers at any company > can use the code under the terms of the license, for anything they > please. They can make a product for profit. Only the company itself > can’t use the code. THIS IS 100% CORRECT > I’m not suggesting the OSI consider this license as an open source > candidate. Why not? > I’m suggesting that if employees at Big Companies encounter code > licensed under this license, they can be glad they are people, and > people get to use this code for whatever they wish.
Again, you have grasped my interpretation perfectly. Wonderful. _______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
