Simon, thanks for your reminder. I do not believe there has been any formal
statement from OSI regarding proprietary software used in conjunction with open
source software. Many approved open source licenses, however, already do deal
in various ways with that relationship. Please confirm that.
Stefano Maffulli wrote:
Various OSI leaders have indicated that they agree that proprietary software is
harmful over the years, and, as such I had thought there had already been a
position change by OSI from being neutral about proprietary software toward a
pro-software-rights position that see
[Disclaimer: the statements below reflect the best of our recollection, but
we can't guarantee that our memory of events that are in some cases 30 or
more years in the past are accurate. It is only because of Bradley Kuhn's
judgmental and misleading posting that we want to respond.]
On 10/27/
The quotation from my 2005 Open Source Licensing book drew an update from
Peter Deutsch. He asked that I update the history. Here it is:
While your account was accurate for quite a few years, Artifex eventually
abandoned the AFPL / GPL division, I believe because they found that it was
a bit of
[This email is BCC Peter Deutsch and Kyle Mitchell.]
To: OSI License Discuss
A bit of history about what you are calling “delayed source” in your recent
emails.
My friend, Peter Deutsch, invented what we then called “eventual licensing”
for his Ghostscript software. This software was ma
