RE: Request for a license change

Hi Murray,
At 17:19 18-03-10, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>My current plan, unless anyone objects, is to go with GPLv3 as of
>v2.0.1, whose release is imminent (I'm just waiting to hear back
>from Yahoo! about the problem with their signatures that's been reported).

This is a quick reaction until I catch up with the previous
comments. I object to GPLv3.

>My feeling is that the advertising clause we have now does us more
>harm than good; although the intent is publicity for a fledgling
>project, we're more likely to get some if we become ubiquitous
>rather than having our name required in advertising materials that a
>lot of people wouldn't read anyway. Given that, I'm more concerned
>with protecting us against the use of OpenDKIM in commercial
>software without permission, or with ensuring the free availability
>of improvements others make. GPLv3 would do that better than BSD would.

GPL only says that you need to provide the source code of the
changes. Most of the time, that is enforced that is through letter
writing campaigns. The corporate world have found ways to circumvent
GPL. GPLv3 tries to prevent that. I don't know how the patent
clauses affects OpenDKIM.

Regards,
-sm
Received on Fri Mar 19 2010 - 01:30:16 PST