Karl Fogel at
Hunh. I didn't fully understand this response, but you're unlikely to write something that doesn't make sense, so I'll ponder it more and see if I understand. If I still don't understand it, then maybe at least I can distill down what I was saying in a more clear and precise way (which I wasn't doing here on identi.ca) and see where that goes.
in short, I disputed the point that the additional permission was not an integral part of the autoconf license, as you'd suggested. the license is the complete set of applicable permissions and conditions, not just an identifiable and recognizable variant (subset?) thereof, even if those combined permissions and conditions allow the distribution under the variant.
indeed, the easy fix for the OSD would be to recognize and endorse such arrangements in which the program is licensed under conditions that allow the distribution under alternate terms that satisfy the definition