On 2002.05.17, David Alan Black <dblack / candle.superlink.net> wrote:
> Whether or not the OPL "even" allows you to "redistribute [the work]
> as part of a non free book" (the example you used to defend your "do
> whatever you want" misreading) is not the issue.  The issue is whether
> or not the OPL allows you to distribute a translation of the book (a
> "modified version", in the terms of the license) without including the
> above copyright notice.  I see nothing in the OPL granting you
> permission to do this.

Excellent point.  The OPL gives the option to the creator of the
derived work to _additionally_ encumber the derived work but must
include the OPL in addition to whatever the creator of the derived
work desires.

While this does change the licensing of the derived work compared
to the original, it ensures that the original rights holder's
desires to have their work licensed via the OPL are respected.

-- Dossy

-- 
Dossy Shiobara                       mail: dossy / panoptic.com 
Panoptic Computer Network             web: http://www.panoptic.com/ 
  "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
    folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)