| |||||||||||||
MPL nominal charge for source codeMPL nominal charge for source codePosted Jan 10, 2011 3:33 UTC (Mon) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106)In reply to: MPL nominal charge for source code by giraffedata Parent article: Mozilla releases a beta of the revised MPL
Why not simply say "at cost"? That seems more in line with the author's intent: distributors can charge recipients (at most) the actual cost of providing a copy. Or, to give distributors a profit-based motive to point out that source code is available, perhaps something like "up to 5% over cost".
(Log in to post comments)
MPL nominal charge for source code Posted Jan 10, 2011 3:43 UTC (Mon) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] The problem with a simple "at cost" is that that can reasonably be interpreted to include the cost of developing the code. It's probably worth a few extra words to make sure those costs are excluded.
|
|||||||||||||