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

Luis Villa luis at tieguy.org
Thu Aug 9 20:12:45 UTC 2012


On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Richard Fontana <fontana at sharpeleven.org> wrote:
> 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.

I understand now; thanks. It feels like this should be combined with
the inbound/outbound provisions as a kind of defacto mini-CLA, and
they should stay in (or out) together.

Luis


More information about the copyleft-next mailing list