3 ms·
#1 only applies to aggregate distributions "containing programs from several different sources". As such it clearly would not apply to distributing a single pro
by nybble41 6y ago
#1 only applies to aggregate distributions "containing programs from several different sources". As such it clearly would not apply to distributing a single program. One program by itself is not an aggregate as the term is commonly used and certainly does not contain programs from several different sources.
#6 is titled "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavour" and explicitly refers to commercial use as a field of endeavour. The annotated version[1] says:
> Rationale: The major intention of this clause is to prohibit license traps that prevent open source from being used commercially. We want commercial users to join our community, not feel excluded from it.
Restricting commercial distribution of modified versions would discriminate against commercial users. I argue that the word "use" in this context is referring not only to running the program but to the exercise of any of the freedoms outlined in the Open Source Definition.
[1] https://opensource.org/osd-annotated https://opensource.org/osd-annotated
- mindcrime 6y agoRestricting commercial distribution of modified versions would discriminate against commercial users. That depends on whether or not "use" and "distribute" are seen as two completely different "things", or whether distribution is a subtype of usage. It makes more sense, to me, for it to be the latter - but the actual text of the OSD is a little bit ambiguous on that point. At least to my reading. Still, regardless of how one justifies it, I feel like it's pretty well accepted that a "you can't sell this commercially" clause in a license makes it non-OSD compliant. As it should be.