I've asked the OSI license mailing list about this, and I wanted to get the Debian take on it. I didn't see this discussion anywhere else on this list already. Sorry if I missed it.
The OSI has approved version 1.3 of the NASA Open Source Agreement (NOSA), but the FSF has a problem with section 3, paragraph G of the license. The issue that the FSF cites is as follows: "The NASA Open Source Agreement, version 1.3, is not a free software license because it includes a provision requiring changes to be your “original creation”. Free software development depends on combining code from third parties, and the NASA license doesn't permit this." Here's a link to the NOSA v1.3: http://opensource.gsfc.nasa.gov/documents/NASA_Open_Source_Agreement_1.3.pdf I noticed that WorldWind (which was released under the NOSA) is in the non-free repository. It has also been explained to me that this could be because the WorldWind Java repositories are closed, and not necessarily because of the license. In general, it sounds like there is not a consensus on whether or not the NOSA is actually a free software license. I was wondering if the NOSA is indeed considered by the Debian community to be a non-free license, and if so what would need to be changed to get NOSA licensed software out of the non-free repositories. The discussion on the OSI list is here: http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:17058:201104:kpokeidhhkjmdjmkjknd And notes on licensing issues from the 2011 NASA Open Source Summit are here: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1TagS_gwDhDfxjr7WpG78_aIcfoPO1tMXBPeCMEE3-Us&pli=1 What got me started researching this was an idea that was posted on NASA's IdeaScale page: http://opennasaplan.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Revise-NOSA-to-become-more-free/123641-7200 Any thoughts? Thanks, Jeremy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=pw6s-yxzgoyaju1tdmuhyhju...@mail.gmail.com