> APSL 1.2 seems to discriminate between distribution for research use > and distribution for commercial use (by imposing different obligations).
Yes, it does, however in both cases the licensing satisfies the Open Source Definition. It's like making boys use the boys room and girls use the girls room. It would be unacceptable discrimination to not have any girls room at all.
So the word "restrict" in OSD#6 (and the word "prevent" in the rationale) should be interpreted narrowly to mean "completely preclude"? Meaning, there's no obligation for all fields of endeavor to be on equal footing; it's (definitionally) acceptable for the license to impose arbitrarily onerous terms on just a single field of endeavor (for example, all commercial use, or all genetic research), so long as use in that field of endeavor is not completely precluded? (Not trying to dispute, just trying to understand.)
Not knowing how this list works, are there people who speak authoritatively on interpretations of the OSD?
- Bob
-- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
