Re: RFC 211 (v1) The Artistic License Must Be Changed

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Ing-Simmons" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: RFC 211 (v1) The Artistic License Must Be Changed


> Perl6 Rfc Librarian <[email protected]> writes:
> >=head3 Bruce Perens
> >
> >Bruce Perens, while a member of Open Source Initiative (OSI), stated:
> >
> >Section 5 of the Artistic License prohibits sale of the software,
>
> >yet allows
> >an aggregate software distribution of more than one program to be sold.
So,
> >if you bundle an Artistic-licensed program with a 5-line hello-world.c,
you
> >can sell the bundle.
>
> That is one of the things I like about the AL - it does not really
> "prohibit sale" at all.

yes, one of the strengths of the Perl community is that there is a place for
ActiveState and there rather good efforts

they are happily making money (I hope) out of free s/w by adding value to
it -- I *can't* see this as a bad thing as it seems to have opened the
user-base up more than just slightly

> >=head3 Bradley M. Kuhn
> >
> >
> >One problem is the definition of "Reasonable Copying Fee" given in the
> >license.  It is possible the definition means: "You can charge any amount
as
> >copying fee, if people will pay it".  If this interpretation is correct,
> >there is no real legal limit on the fee at all.
>
> That is again my understanding of the AL and again it is a feature I like.
>

yes -- the more ppl who can make money by adding value the better... it will
widen the user-base and improve the quality of the peripheral s/w