MPL nominal charge for source code
Posted Jan 7, 2011 16:55 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata
In reply to: MPL nominal charge for source code
Parent article: Mozilla releases a beta of the revised MPL
2. (of a price, consideration, etc.) named as a mere matter of form, being trifling in comparison with the actual value; minimal.
That's a corollary of the simpler, more fundamental definition I gave ("in name"), and even in this extended form, I don't think that's what the authors had in mind. I don't think they wanted to preserve a distributor's right to claim that he didn't give it away for free -- what would be the point of that?
Remember, of course, once one person has the code, they can distribute
it for free if they like. And if some company is obstructive, there's no
better way of ensuring the first guy to pay the money distributes it
loudly and widely at no charge.
Apparently, the authors don't believe that this market force is enough to stop a distributor from requiring a large payment for the source code, or they wouldn't have mentioned a charge at all.
So I still think they should come up with a better way than "more than nominal" of describing what kind of charge for source code disqualifies the distributor from the license.
to post comments)