Generalize non-exclusion of implied licenses.
Delete explicit non-exclusion of implied patent licenses subclause.

This text originates in the final sentence of GPLv3 section 11.

I believe it is either unnecessary belt-and-suspenders drafting or
else merits some further legal research before re-inclusion (or both).
Slightly clearer wording of exclusion part of 'Licensed Patents' definition.
Clarify OSI-approval reference in Proprietary Relicensing section.
Reformat section 4, with minor clarification.

Previously, there was a parenthetical indicating that notice
preservation applied to Derived Works only to the extent they remain
pertinent. The wording f the clause might seem to sggest that this
"pertinence clarification" applies only to "legal notices" and not
also "textual author attributions".
Change title of section 6 to "Pass-Through".

The previous term, "direct licensing", was one I learned from Till
Jaeger and Axel Metzger in the GPLv3 process. GPLv3 itself uses
"automatic licensing" in the title of section 10. I have heard at
least one US lawyer refer to the automatic licensing provision of GPL
as a "pass through" and I have decided to adopt such terminology in
the title.
Merge branch 'master' of git://github.com/richardfontana/copyleft-next
interchange -> exchange

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Revert "Delete GOALS file.". For personal use, I find this short file helpful.

This reverts commit 3d5f37966990f38325ab3deeb14d557ce2290cc7.
I made a copy and removed all clauses unrelated to copyleft, distribution, copyright license grants and conditions.
No patents, nor other clauses. They're irelevant for the experiment.
(yes, the license text is wonderfully readable, but hey. Not yet Apache license size.)

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Several words shorter. (I feel the grammar isn't fine though.)

I wonder if the replaced phrase has any effect which wasn't covered by 7.

It does say something interesting: there are conceivable aggregations of Covered
Works and Separate Works, which (may) produce licensing effects. That scenario must
be covered, and it must be covered by CS... but CS doesn't strictly say that
Separate Works are under the license, it says you have to provide a list (iii).
Maybe it's (ii), but I doubt it. (I doubt it's only (ii)).

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Refactored Distribute Corresponding Source under this license,
making the licensing requirement part of 5: Distribute Covered Works.

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Remove definition of 'minimum period' because it's not relevant to the experiment at the moment.

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Experimental addition of the EPL compatibility clause as OSI licenses compatibility.
Added the EPL compatibility clause in the form discussed on the mailing list,
adapted to apply to any FOSS license. Kept the same criterium, OSI approval, as
Proprietary Relicensing clause.
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/copyleft-next/2012-August/000131.html

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Consolidate Distribution of Object Code.
Refactored section 9 into 8: network distribution of object code
is a case of distribution of object code. This allows the section
to say everything it has to say about the conditions of distribution,
separately from other sections.

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Simplify juxtaposed compatibility clause.
If the other license doesn't allow it, the combination simply isn't possible,
I'm not sure why it needs specified in this license.

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Refactored Distribute Corresponding Source under this license,
making the licensing requirement part of 5: Distribute Covered Works.
(it doesn't seem fully appropriate though)

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Consolidate Distribution of Object Code.

Refactored section 9 into 8: network distribution of object code
is a case of distribution of object code.

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Remove 'mere' from 'mere distribution'

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
Missed that section 8.2 already specified license for CS.
Removed duplicate now.

Signed-off-by: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>