[copyleft-next] proprietary relicensing clause [was Re: Compatibility with Eclipse Public License.]

Richard Fontana fontana at sharpeleven.org
Wed Aug 8 21:21:15 UTC 2012


On 08/08/2012 03:16 PM, Tom Marble wrote:
> On 08/08/2012 02:11 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
>> Could you give a bit more background on this clause, Richard? I had
>> flagged it as "ask Richard what the purpose of this clause is"
>> (because I didn't understand it) but hadn't had an opportunity to ask.
>

> Without the benefit of the actual origins my guess
> is that the purpose is proprietary relicensing deflation.

Yes. The proposed provision does not prevent proprietary relicensing,
but it is intended to render it ineffective, or more precisely to make
copyleft-next an unattractive license for those who seek to pursue
such strategies.

The provision comes about 10 or more years too late, I suppose.
Nevertheless I still consider it worthwhile, even as I struggle to
keep the (vanilla) copyleft-next draft under 300 lines.

> With the advent of CLA's we have found that the goals
> of copyleft have been subverted through copyright aggregation.
>
> This clause cannot prevent copyright aggregation, but
> it does effectively restore an "even playing field"
> should a copyright aggregator attempt the now common
> Proprietary Relicensing asymmetry.

Yes. Well said.


 - RF





More information about the copyleft-next mailing list