Hans de Goede (j w r degoede hhs nl) said:
Someone building an OS on top of it may not qualify for the
'normal access fees' test.
Someone building an OS on top would be in trouble with any freely
distributable content, as freely distributable != being able to build on
top of it. This thus seems a non argument as the guidelines talk about
"to freely distribute" wich clear != "to build a(n) XXXX on top of it"
Huh?
If you can't build XXX on top of it and distribute it, that's not
freely distributable.