On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:41 AM, André Charles Legendre < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Shane > > Open Source Initiative consider that to be "open source" a project > cannot be published under NDA. (see below) > http://www.opensource.org/osr > > The question is : is Open Source Initiative stupid to ask for this > requirement ? > Look at the board members before to say that they are stupid : > http://www.opensource.org/board The requirement is not stupid, but the way I read it is that the licensor can't require that the licensee include NDAs within distributions of the derivative open-source work, while still calling it open source; it does not preclude the option of the licensee doing so if they want. For example, Google can use ASL 2.0 code, modify and redistribute with an NDA. They may not however, license their own code (or derivatives) as ASL AND attach an additional NDA clause to the the ASL license, saying that anyone modifying the ASL code must also attach the NDA. That would go against open-source requirements. I really don't want to do Google's homework for them, so they are the best to respond. Shane > > > Personally I believe that this requirement is normal and problems that > we have now with Android are a good demonstration : the community out > of the NDA is locked and unhappy. > > Regards > > Andre Charles Legendre > > http://www.opensource.org/osr > > Open Standards Requirement for Software > Mon, 2006-07-24 22:14 — Michael Tiemann > The Requirement > > An "open standard" must not prohibit conforming implementations in > open source software. > The Criteria > > To comply with the Open Standards Requirement, an "open standard" must > satisfy the following criteria. If an "open standard" does not meet > these criteria, it will be discriminating against open source > developers. > > 1. No Intentional Secrets: The standard MUST NOT withhold any > detail necessary for interoperable implementation. As flaws are > inevitable, the standard MUST define a process for fixing flaws > identified during implementation and interoperability testing and to > incorporate said changes into a revised version or superseding version > of the standard to be released under terms that do not violate the > OSR. > 2. Availability: The standard MUST be freely and publicly available > (e.g., from a stable web site) under royalty-free terms at reasonable > and non-discriminatory cost. > 3. Patents: All patents essential to implementation of the standard MUST: > * be licensed under royalty-free terms for unrestricted use, or > * be covered by a promise of non-assertion when practiced by > open source software > 4. No Agreements: There MUST NOT be any requirement for execution > of a license agreement, NDA, grant, click-through, or any other form > of paperwork to deploy conforming implementations of the standard. > 5. No OSR-Incompatible Dependencies: Implementation of the standard > MUST NOT require any other technology that fails to meet the criteria > of this Requirement. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Announcing the new M5 SDK! http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/02/android-sdk-m5-rc14-now-available.html For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
