On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > > Now consider a similar license with one change: only the original > > developer may release under a proprietary license. Such a change > > reduces the number of people who can take the software proprietary. It > > seems like if the case above is a Free license, then this one would be > > as well, and would actually be preferable. > > This is not Free. It gives these grants: > > 1) Distribute with source, passing this license along. > > 2) or, if you're Bob, under a proprietary license without source. > > Now I have only one grant of permission. I have to pass along 2, but > I don't get to take advantage of it at all.
Since it was specified that Bob holds the copyright, this licence is equivalent to the same licence without clause 2 at all. ----- Peter Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]