Mandrake and the commercial license
contact at guillaumeponce.org
Tue Dec 17 17:10:59 UTC 2002
Nor I do.
> A contributer needs to give them permission to publish the code as
> non-free software.
I agree with this.
If they (Mandrake Software) put their license, I think they must be
the copyright holder of the software. Or at least they must get such
a permission from a contributer who would keep being the copyright
holder of his contribution. In fact, it is like this contributer dual
licensing his contribution.
Is dual licencing `viral'? ;)
I see this kind of dual licensing as:
1. If you want it free, you can have it free.
2. If you want to proprietarize your derivative work, you can do so.
Wouldn't they have the same effect with a single non-copyleft free
software licence, such as BSD?
In fact, there is a difference: with this free *and copyleft* /
proprietary dual licencing you have to pay to have the power to deny
other people de freedoms you received. With a non-copyleft free
software licence, it's gratis to do so.
I don't like the idea of reducing freedom. And I don't like the idea
of paying to have the power to do so...
More information about the Discussion