I don't.
Nor I do.
A contributer needs to give them permission to publish the code as non-free software.
I agree with this.
If they (Mandrake Software) put their license, I think they must be the copyright holder of the software. Or at least they must get such a permission from a contributer who would keep being the copyright holder of his contribution. In fact, it is like this contributer dual licensing his contribution.
Is dual licencing `viral'? ;)
I see this kind of dual licensing as:
1. If you want it free, you can have it free.
2. If you want to proprietarize your derivative work, you can do so.
Wouldn't they have the same effect with a single non-copyleft free software licence, such as BSD?
In fact, there is a difference: with this free *and copyleft* / proprietary dual licencing you have to pay to have the power to deny other people de freedoms you received. With a non-copyleft free software licence, it's gratis to do so.
I don't like the idea of reducing freedom. And I don't like the idea of paying to have the power to do so...
Guillaume Ponce http://www.guillaumeponce.org/