I've been giving some thought to the feasibility of a permissive licensing with strong non-discriminatory provisions -- being incompatible with licenses that violating OSD 5 or 6, rather than just itself abiding by the clauses.
It seems clear that we can accomplish this goal with copyleft licenses, but the permissive case is less clear. The GPLv3, for example, sweeps up any hypothetical discriminatory provisions by forbidding "further restrictions": "All other non-permissive additional terms are considered “further restrictions” within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term." A bar on "further restrictions" that applies to source distribution but not binaries might hew a compromise. End users could incorporate the code into commercial works, but a fork could not introduce restrictive provisions. Separate from the question of feasibility is the policy question. Is strong non-discrimination desirable in open source software licensing? Brendan
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
