Re: [Bitpim-devel] BitPim license change

[Roger B. <ro...@ro...>]

> How did this stretch the Artistic License?

See section 2:

  http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license.php

Now do you want to argue over wether supporting wallpapers,
phonebook and ringtones in 0.62 is a feature or bug/portability
fix?  The individual concerned claimed them as bug fixes
and consequently what they distributed as "the standard version".
They also didn't publish their changes for the same reasons.

And they didn't even have the courtesy to tell anyone what they
were doing, or ask advice.  That isn't required, but is general
good practise.  So combine all these actions together with the
section 2 loopholes, and someone determined can make a real
mess.
  
> How does the change to OSL mitigate future similar occurrences?

Section 6+3, and worst case section 4 (I could trademark the name
BitPim).

Roger