Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml license - why not GPL?

[Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>]

> If I understand well, Alex can choose the (3) and get a license that is GPL
> compatible. But as it has been said before the only licenses compatible with
> GPL are weaker license, that are "at least" GPL. So a company getting into
> the Caml Consortium might get rights to redistribute the compiler as GPL ?
> Are you sure about that ?

Yes, that would be allowed as part of the Consortium agreement.  But
you have to keep in mind that Consortium membership is a contract, not
a license, and that this contract is to be renewed every year.  This
means that INRIA can unilaterally refuse that someone becomes a member
of the consortium, or refuse to renew the membership.  

So, if you come to us and say "I want to become a consortium member
and my sole purpose is to redistribute the OCaml compilers under the
GPL", your membership application will most likely be rejected.  And
if you don't tell us but become a member, then redistribute the OCaml
compilers under the GPL, your membership will not be renewed and
you'll lose your special privileges for subsequent OCaml releases.

However, if Alex Barretta comes to us with a licensing plan that
solves his issue but is acceptable to us (i.e. no GPL relicensing of
the whole OCaml compilers), we'll do our best to help.

You see, consortium membership is based on mutual trust and the desire
to do things that will be beneficial to both parties (the member and
INRIA).  Abuse is possible but won't get you very far (except being
labeled as a weasel).

- Xavier Leroy