Re: business models [was patent stuff]

[David Weinehall]

On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 07:22:16PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 18:13, Adam J. Richter wrote:
> > 	You could license all programs that consist entirely of
> > free software.  That way, BSD, LGPL, and MPL software that did
> > not link in proprietary software would be allowed too, but your
> > example of a proprietary program that linked in the BSD'ed
> > libpatent.o/c would not be covered by this permission.
> 
> Define "free software" using only legally defined phrases which have
> precedent. In fact put four people in a room and get them to define free
> software.
> 
> > software would address issues like GPL'ed software that contains
> > content that is GPL compatible but not GPL'ed, future versions of
> 
> If its linked then it is GPL in the linked form, otherwise you wouldn't
> be allowed to link it

An interesting question is whether the licensing terms used for this
patent would pass the DFSG (Debian Free Software Guidelines)?!

/David
  _                                                                 _
 // David Weinehall <[e-mail]> /> Northern lights wander      \\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\>  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/    </   Full colour fire           </