Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb(_at_)guppylake(_dot_)com>:
This strikes me as oversimplistic. What if a commercial enterprise
wanted to license its IPR in such a way that it put no constraints on
open source, but retained constraints on commercial competitors? I'm
not sure you can get around a technical mandate for some kind of
license and still retain those options. -- Nathaniel
Your suspicion is correct. The problem -- which I and others looked for
a way around for years, to no avail -- is that there is no bright-line
way to separate "commercial" from "noncommercial" activity. All attempts
trip over edge cases like this:
* A distributor aggregating software to be sold as a CD-ROM anthology
for a modest fee.
* An engineer using software for development on a project which is not
yet software for sale, but intended to be in the future.
* Development activity taking place at a for-profit subsidiary of a
non-profit association.
The open-source community figured out by about 1997-1998 that there is
no way to discriminate between "commercial" and "noncommercial" activity
that does not create fatal uncertainties about who has what rights at
what times. When you add the problems of mixing software with licenses having
*different versions* of such a distinction the downside gets even worse.
Thus, the licensing guidelines of both the OSI and FSF forbid attempts at this.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf