Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 05 Oct 2002 17:41:43 +0400 | From | Hans Reiser <> | Subject | Re: New BK License Problem? |
| |
I don't see how your wording changes anything in regards to whether the effect is to restrain trade.
Hans
FD Cami wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hans Reiser wrote: > | Oh my, does this mean that if I use BitKeeper software, I am a > | participant in a conspiracy to restrain trade? > | > | Consider: I make reiser4 available by bitkeeper. Competitor of larry > | wants to use reiser4 but can't access it because access requires > | bitkeeper. Larry has given me an incentive to participate in > | discriminating against his competitors (free license for > bitkeeper). Am > | I legally liable and subject to criminal charges if a Clinton judge > gets > | the case? > | > | Hans > > Good point... Although I think it would be unfair, for example, to > be able to use BitKeeper to develop a _commercial_ product that > would compete with BitKeeper. > So, _maybe_ the license should be : > > " > Notwithstanding any other terms in this License, this License is not > available to You if You and/or your employer develop, produce, > sell, and/or resell a closed source (GPL, like CVS) product which > contains substantially similar capabilities of the BitKeeper Software, > or, in the reasonable opinion of BitMover, competes with the BitKeeper > Software. > " > > But of course, who am I to decide... Larry ? ;-) > > FD Cami > >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |