Lawrence Rosen wrote:
Simon Phipps wrote:
> Mind you, OSI has described itself as a standards body for open
source licenses
> for a long time, see http://opensource.org/about (I believe that
text used to be
> on the home page).
Perhaps, but that term has thus been misused. There is absolutely
nothing about OSI – its governance policies, its procedures, its
membership rules, its board selections, or its activities – that would
in any sense qualify OSI as a standards organization.
Can you elaborate on that please? OSI appears to be at least partially
acting as a standard formation organization (particularly vis-a-vis the
"Open Source Definition"). In your opinion, what precludes it from
acting as a voluntary standards organization in a manner similar to
IEEE, ISOC (IETF), W3C, and so forth. Arguably, its governance is a
mess - for example bylaws that state it's not a membership organization,
while at the same time soliciting members - but is that a show-stopper?
Miles Fidelman
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
