James E. Harrell, Jr. scripsit: > I just tried to visit the website to see if BitKeeper's license > is already OSD approved- but the site isn't there. It's part of my > argument, so I'll go out on a limb and assume it is OSD approved. If > not, you can safely ignore part of this email, though it's only half > of the argument. :)
Bitkeeper's license is not and never has been an OSI-approved Open Source license. > I would think it bad faith to change the definition based on a pending > license in order to be able to specifically exclude this license. This may > not be the case- but from the (very) outside- that's what it looks like. On the contrary. The OSD is an attempt to capture a certain spirit in a form of words. If a license is presented that conforms to the form of words but violates the spirit, it is appropriate to change the form. This is not ex post facto, because it affects a license proposed for approval, not one already approved. In addition, it is not a *punishment* to be denied license approval. As to already-approved licenses, they could be grandfathered. > I don't see significant harm in users indicating consent via click-wrap. See my earlier posting. While this sounds tolerable for individual applications, it gets difficult for component libraries -- and almost any program can be a "component" in scripting situations. And if once-and-for- all consent is sufficient, who maintains a sufficiently secure consent database, and when is consent asked for? On a multi-user system, asking at installation time is insufficient, for new persons may be added whose consent must also be extracted. Use restrictions are a bad idea because they are a *practical* nightmare, just as notice requirements (if you use my code, you must give notice) was a practical nightmare. > Maybe I'm in the wrong place? If click-wrap is specifically excluded, > then our product and desired license also won't meet the OSD. So maybe > it will just have to be open source (with a lower case "O" and "S")? No one can stop you from saying so; the language is free for all to use. But please don't. It is disingenuous and will bring you bad publicity. -- Deshil Holles eamus. Deshil Holles eamus. Deshil Holles eamus. Send us, bright one, light one, Horhorn, quickening, and wombfruit. (3x) Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa! Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa! Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa! -- Joyce, _Ulysses_, "Oxen of the Sun" [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
