Re: "open source"? or not?

For the record, here is my reply to however "Mike Linksvayer" 
<[email protected]> is.

Cheers,

R.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Zoe <[email protected]>
> Date: January 31, 2005 01:35:10 CET
> To: Mike Linksvayer <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: zoe license & creative commons
>
> On Jan 31, 2005, at 01:14, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>
>> I note that your FAQ 
>> http://zoe.nu/itstories/story.php?data=stories&num=2&sec=1 says that 
>> ZOE is open source and that it uses a Creative Commons 
>> Attribution-NonCommercial license.
>
> Yes.
>
>> FYI, the CC license you're using is not open source.
>
> According to whom?
>
>>   To qualify as open source a license must not discriminate by use 
>> http://opensource.org/docs/definition.php#6 .
>
> This is according to an entity calling itself "Open Source 
> Initiative". Which seems to be a registered non-profit with 501(c)(3) 
> status something or other.
>
> What does this has to do with the locution "open source"?
>
> o·pen-source
> adj.
>
> Of or relating to source code that is available to the public: an 
> open-source operating system.
>
> http://www.answers.com/open+source&r=67
>
>> Creative Commons recommends using an open source license for 
>> software, see http://creativecommons.org/faq#faq_entry_3646 .
>
> Good for them.
>
>> You may wish to consider using an open source license for ZOE, but 
>> you definitely should not call it open source if you continue to use 
>> the CC by-nc license.
>
> Why?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Z.
>



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl