A discussion of hybrid open source and proprietary licensing models.

["David Christie" <dc AT samizdat.org>]

> > > Marius Amado Alves wrote:
> > >
> > > Please point to the CopyFlex license. I looked around and did not find 
> > > it.

All I could find was this "proposed terms" for an specialized instance of
it. Maybe it does not quite exist yet.

http://ccs.mit.edu/ophi/PH%20open%20licensing%20-%20Redux%2003b%20-tm.htm

> > > From what I did find, it seems no, it will not be OSI-compliant, it will 
> > > probably breach clause 6 like the rest of us. But we need to see the 
> > > license to know for sure.
> >
> > David Christie wrote:
> >
> > I don't think CopyFlex breaches OSD clause 6, any more than the GPL does, 
> > but I may have missed something.
> >
> > It doesn't seem to impose more restrictions than the GPL. As I understand 
> > it, it is a clever compromise between GPL-like and BSD-like licenses --  
> > it has copyleft like GPL but that expires after a period of time, so the 
> > license becomes like BSD eventually.

You are quite right that we can't judge if it's OSD-compatible without a
copy of the exact license.

And sorry, I didn't mean to take this exchange private. I meant to reply to
the list but replied to you privately instead.