Is it just me, again?

[Richmond]

On 04/13/2013 03:48 AM, Dr. Hawkins wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Cal Horner <calhorner at xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>> "I can use anything that is developed in LC OSS within my commercial LC
>> environment. But if there is a password protection on something I have been
>> using for awhile, and wish to continue to use, that plug-in can't be used in
>> a LC OSS development environment."
>>
>> I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seems something is askew.
> Among other things,  the combined program would be a derivative work
> of both the OSS work and the plug-in.
>
> The GPL component requires that the combined work be treated, which
> isn't something that can be done with the commercial part, so no
> mixing.
>
> The GPL pretty much can't be combined with anything. "GPL compatible"
> means "can be re-licensed under the GPL"; this "compatibility" is a
> one-way trip.
>
> There is a lot of room in the OSS world for a license between the free
> BSD/MIT type licenses, and the viral GPL; something that requires
> disclosure of source code, but that allows mixed license in the
> ultimate program.

Indeed that is true.

But one could argue that by blocking the use of password protected 
stacks and plugins
LC OSS (or RunRev) is restricting end-users' freedom to create and issue 
software that
employs a mixed license.

At the moment I can see all sorts of 'things' that are restricting 
end-users' freedom in a
way which is not really in the spirit of OSS.

-----------------------------------------

About 6-7 years ago I wrote to the Ubuntu people (Canonical) offering 
them copies of my EFL standalones to put on their Edubuntu distro. I was 
told that they liked my programs but the
could not (actually whether it was a case of couldn't or wouldn't was a 
bit unclear) include them
because, although I was giving them away (i.e. Free gifties), they had 
been made using proprietary software.

This strikes me as a very narrow view of things; or, as my English 
Granny was wont to say,

"Don't look a gift-horse in the mouth"

and as her father (my Great-Grandfather Tom Elkington) was the champion 
horse-whisperer
(before all the fancy publicity) of Norfolk in the 1920s it was a real 
case of what my Grandfather (Scots)
said; "She do know."

----------------------------------------

I see absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever with a mixed license, just as 
long as everything is properly
documented in terms of licensing.

Richmond.