On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 04:32:09PM -0700, Lawrence Rosen wrote: > The CPOL 1.02 license was discussed on this list in 2009. [1, and see > attached.) As far as I can tell from reading my old emails and reviewing the > OSI license list, it was never approved by OSI. Richard Fontana said this > about > it on 10/5/2009: > > > > This license recently came to our attention at Red Hat. The CPOL fails to meet > the Open Source Definition (and Free Software Definition) in numerous ways. > I've already been in contact with people at codeproject.com about this. > > > > Yet Black Duck reports that this is the 8th most popular open source license.
Heh. The CPOL was just being discussed in the legal track I'm in at LFCollab today. I reiterated my view that it is not a free software or open source license and that no one should use any code under it. :) - RF > [1] > > > > Popularity isn't all that matters! > > > > /Larry > > > > [1] http://www.codeproject.com/info/cpol10.aspx > > [2] http://osrc.blackducksoftware.com/data/licenses/ > > > > > > Lawrence Rosen > > Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com) > > 3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482 > > Cell: 707-478-8932 > > > > Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 12:44:06 -0700 > From: Joe Bell <joe.b...@prodeasystems.com> > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > Subject: First Post / Question Regarding CPOL 1.02 > X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 > > Hi all: > > > > This is my first post to this particular discussion group - please be gentle > and refer me to a FAQ if I egregiously violated any list rules. > > > > My question is regarding the Code Project Open License (http:// > www.codeproject.com/info/cpol10.aspx) and whether or not anyone has done a > “rigorous” analysis of it - I did notice that it isn’t an OSI-approved open > source license, but the fact is that it does cover quite a variety of useful > C# > and .NET projects on the Code Project website and I’d be interested to learn > other’s opinions on any gotchas and/or loopholes in this license. > > > > Best regards, > > Joe > > > > > This message is confidential to Prodea Systems, Inc unless otherwise indicated > or apparent from its nature. This message is directed to the intended > recipient > only, who may be readily determined by the sender of this message and its > contents. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an > employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended > recipient:(a)any dissemination or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited; and(b)immediately notify the sender by return message and destroy > any copies of this message in any form(electronic, paper or otherwise) that > you > have.The delivery of this message and its information is neither intended to > be > nor constitutes a disclosure or waiver of any trade secrets, intellectual > property, attorney work product, or attorney-client communications. The > authority of the individual sending this message to legally bind Prodea > Systems > is neither apparent nor implied,and must be independently verified. > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org > http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
