I'm the chair of the license approval committee. This is my report for the current set of licenses under discussion. If anybody disagrees with my assessment of the committee's conclusions, say so promptly.
-- We've sat on this license submission for far too long. It's a clever and innovative license which we should approve. Title: EU DataGrid Software License Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7072:200308:fcnekdmjcpiaemibokne License: http://eu-datagrid.web.cern.ch/eu-datagrid/license.html Comments: John Cowan: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7262:eplnoepdlnfmkgagdbmp Ernie Prabhakar: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7262:200309:eplnoepdlnfmkgagdbmp Dave Presotto: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7337:eplnoepdlnfmkgagdbmp Recommend: approval. -- Minor revisions to a license we have already approved. Clarification of language and removal of excess parameterization. Title: Lucent Public License Version 1.02 Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7142:200309:onciffgepemojkpkiimk License: http://plan9.bell-labs.com/hidden/lpl102-template.html Comments: Ben Reser: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7744:200402:onciffgepemojkpkiimk Recommend: approval. -- This license, while seeming to comply with the OSD, isn't sufficiently different from the GPL or OSL. It's shorter, but in spite of its length, the GPL is reasonably well understood, so the WSOSL's shortness is not an improvement. Title: The Wilhelm Svenselius Open Source License version 1.1 Submission: Original: http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7080:200308:ekmofmlcjbbcddoaoahj Revised: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7086:200309:pehonmokjnclhgnhddjo License: ttp://home.ws83.net/code/WSOSL.html Comments: John Cowan: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7083:ekmofmlcjbbcddoaoahj Recommend: disapproval. -- This license puts restrictions on the use of software, specifically modifications for private use. Title: Public Security Interrest "PSI" License Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7098:bcgogjkdclpfihdgnoil License: Comments: John Cowan: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7098:bcgogjkdclpfihdgnoil Recommend: disapproval. -- This license is EXTREMELY controversial. It is a license which seems to comply with the OSD, yet whose purpose is explicitly to be incompatible with the GPL. Title: Open Source Software Alliance License Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7133:200309:ahoninpjbapbnmdbglmm License: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~seanc/ossal/ossal.html Comments: many, however the most cogent comment comes from Rick Moen at: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7259:ahoninpjbapbnmdbglmm Recommend: remanding back to the author for rewording. -- MPL 1.1 with the name scratched off and replaced by CUA Office Public License. Danese pointed out that the submittor might be trying to relicense code that could not be relicensed in this manner. He replied that his code was all newly crafted. Title: CUA Office Public License Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7486:hdlmlbkpenifmmkhppdd License: Comments: Danese Cooper: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msn:7486:hdlmlbkpenifmmkhppdd Patranun Limudomporn: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7496:hdlmlbkpenifmmkhppdd Recommend: approval. -- Rod Dixon made a couple of comments the day before Christmas Eve. I think we should contact the Panda3D folks and ask them to respond to Rod's comments. Otherwise I see no reason why we should not approve this license. Title: Panda3D Public License Version 1.0 Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7499:ljampdokbpbinfhgnknf License: http://www.etc.cmu.edu/panda3d/docs/license/ Comments: John Cowan: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7501:ljampdokbpbinfhgnknf Rod Dixon: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7501:200312:ljampdokbpbinfhgnknf Recommend: remanding. -- While I agree with the goals of the license author, he's putting restrictions on the use of the software, and restrictions on use are not allowed. He points to other licenses which restrict some modifications, but they do it at redistribution time, not at use time. Fundamentally, the author is trying to use licensing to substitute for trademark law. Title: Open Test License v1.1 Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7537:200401:cldkhgfpmlhkdcokelpg Comments: Larry Rosen: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7541:200401:cldkhgfpmlhkdcokelpg Rod Dixon: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7545:200401:cldkhgfpmlhkdcokelpg Recommend: disapproval. -- Not different enough from any existing license. We should send it back to them suggesting that they use an existing license. If they simply cannot, and must have this license, then we will approve it upon resubmission. Title: Linisys Open Source License v1.4 Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7586:empnfghoonimjegkodeb Comments: no comments Recommend: remand for reconsideration -- This must surely be the shortest open source license ever! Still, we should send it back to the author because he uses the hated word "utilize". Don't use utilize! Utilize "use" instead. Means the same thing and avoids a phony formality. Title: Fair License Submission: Original: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:msp:7623:hhkgifnkgiiejnigaakm Revised: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7623:200401:hhkgifnkgiiejnigaakm Comments: none Recommend: remanding. -- Revisions to the currently-approved apache license. They tried introducing a defensive patent license clause, but too many people shot at that flag. Title: Apache License 2.0 Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7655:200402:jjibkpabgkibfkdpildd License: Comments: Brian Behlendorf: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7781:200402:jjibkpabgkibfkdpildd John Cowan: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7797:200402:jjibkpabgkibfkdpildd Recommend: approval. -- This license is intended to have the same legal effect as the MIT license, only be simpler to read. Thanks, but that doesn't make it an improvement. We will approve it if the author simply insists, but we officially discourage the proliferation of substantially similar licenses. Title: Simple Permissive License Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7654:200402:ponaihiojnjdnagclgek License: http://zooko.com/simple_permissive_license.html Comments: Ian Lance Taylor: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7656:200402:ponaihiojnjdnagclgek Recommend: disapproval. -- There is much discussion spent deciding whether NASA can copyright software at all. The license itself says that no copyright is claimed in the United States. The only serious concern that I can see is that the license requires the recipient to indemnify the Government of the United States against third party lawsuits. Title: NASA Open Source Agreement Version 1.1 Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7698:200402:jfdgbalgdhgblndpmljm License: http://www.nas.nasa.gov/Research/Software/Open-Source/NASA_Open_Source_Agreement_1.1.txt Comments: ongoing as of this writing. Recommend: more discussion. -- --My blog is at angry-economist.russnelson.com | Coding in Python Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | is like 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | sucking on sugar. Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | Sweet! -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
