From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 19 8: 2: 1 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610D237B423 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 08:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97]) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #4) id 13bOuE-000KCV-00 for chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:01:58 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA70843 for chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:01:58 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:01:58 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: new license idea? Message-ID: <20000919160157.A70731@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org What about a license where all changes must be returned to the original author, but do not have to be made public? This way, the author will not be locked out of improvements to his/her code, and yet it will be at their discretion if they include them in their own code or not. At the same time, those changes would not *have* to be made public. This probably has major holes, but after reading yet-another-license-flame-war, it got me thinking. jcm -- "I drank WHAT ?!" - Socrates To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message