From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD231BC88 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:30:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0VAU0Qj029775 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:30:00 +0100 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA26876 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:29:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from yquem.inria.fr (yquem.inria.fr [128.93.8.37]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0VATwUU029766; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:29:58 +0100 Received: by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix, from userid 18180) id 3F4ECBC88; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:29:58 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:29:58 +0100 From: Xavier Leroy To: Nicolas Cannasse Cc: Alex Baretta , Sven Luther , Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml license - why not GPL? Message-ID: <20050131102958.GA23998@yquem.inria.fr> References: <20050128164744.GG13718@osiris.uid0.sk> <20050129.150538.78035843.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <20050130062235.GC32348@pegasos> <20050131.095711.27629180.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <41FDD853.5090801@barettadeit.com> <20050131073813.GC19902@pegasos> <41FDE282.7040709@barettadeit.com> <20050131090006.GA18352@yquem.inria.fr> <016a01c50779$e62f1650$ef01a8c0@warp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <016a01c50779$e62f1650$ef01a8c0@warp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41FE08A8.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41FE08A6.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 gpl:01 gpl:01 redistribute:01 compiler:01 redistribute:01 ocaml:01 compilers:01 compilers:01 weasel:98 caml:02 alex:03 alex:03 consortium:04 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: > 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