Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:25:41 +0200 From: Shachar Shemesh <wine-devel@shemesh.biz> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Trolling and helping a spammer (was Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License) Message-ID: <40137D85.2050808@shemesh.biz> In-Reply-To: <40131AEA.2000804@mac.com> References: <20040124214735.GE548@foghorn.rsmba.biz> <40131AEA.2000804@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi guys, First, someone who sends the same email to at least four mailing lists (freebsd, wine-devel, postgresql-hackers and ossi) is a spammer in my book. Replying to his email, especially to lists that are not relevant (i.e. - any but ossi) is helping him along. To answer his (asked) question - since this license is clearly LGPL incompatible, I don't think he is likely to make contributions to Wine under this license. At least, not contributions that will be accepted. As his license is also BSD incompatible, I dare say it is equally off topic for FreeBSD and postgresql. This guy is obviously trying to solve the "how can I make money from free software" dillema by introducing a proprietary license and calling it "OpenSource". Interesting idea, but it has been tried before (http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/default.mspx, except they didn't have the audacity to call it open source). This is just a proprietary license. Nothing more to see here. Move along. Shachar P.S. I am not subscribed to the stable@freebsd.org mailing list. A search of the archives did not show this particular Richard Schilling post. I was not sure whether to dump this mail (which is just as off topic as the original one) on that list as well. I'm sorry if I chose wrong. I did notice that on stable@freebsd, Richard is at least an occasional poster. Here on Wine-devel he is a first time poster as far as I can see. This may explain the difference in responses between the lists. Sh. Chuck Swiger wrote: > Richard Schilling wrote: > >> I would like to present to you all a new Open Source software license >> I've written up. > > [ ... ] > > One the face of it, Section III, "Distribution Restrictions and > Obligations." of your license fails to comply with OSD #1 & 2: > > "1. Free Redistribution > > The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away > the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution > containing programs from several different sources. The license shall > not require a royalty or other fee for such sale. > > 2. Source Code > > The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in > source code as well as compiled form...." > > See http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php. > -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Systems Consulting http://www.lingnu.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40137D85.2050808>