> > So then there gonna privatise MAME > > Nope. You missed the whole point. The idea was proposed to move to an OSI-friendly > license, which gets rid of the no-commercial use clause, but still requires most of > the code to be open source. > > LN
"Can Open Source software (OSI) be used for commercial purposes? Absolutely. All Open Source software can be used for commercial purpose; the Open Source Definition guarantees this. You can even sell Open Source software.
However, note that commercial is not the same as proprietary. If you receive software under an Open Source license, you can always use that software for commercial purposes, but that doesn't always mean you can place further restrictions on people who receive the software from you. In particular, so-called copyleft-style Open Source licenses require that when you distribute the software, you do so under the same license you received it under."