Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Lawrence Rosen
Ben Tilly wrote: > Item 1 of the OSD says, "The license shall not restrict any party from > selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software > distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license > shall not require a royalty or other fee for

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Ben Tilly
Item 1 of the OSD says, "The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale." Red Hat's

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Lawrence Rosen
Nigel Tzeng wrote: So Larry and Ben, is RHEL is not open source because you cannot redistribute RHEL without a trademark license from RedHat? [] But you can redistribute RHEL if you don't modify it. If you modify it, apply a different trademark to distinguish it in the marketplace. No

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Tzeng, Nigel H.
So Larry and Ben, is RHEL is not open source because you cannot redistribute RHEL without a trademark license from RedHat? If an explicit patent grant is a requirement for open source should an explicit trademark grant also be required? Does CPAL provide an implicit permission to use

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Ben Tilly
Looking at the open source definition, it should be able apply to any license of any kind. The argument is that the patent grant is not open source because the inability to continue using the software after suing Facebook for patent infringement is a "price". However you are unable to use the

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Lawrence Rosen
OSD #7 has something to say about an "additional license" being needed for software: 7. Distribution of License The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties. I assumed

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Tzeng, Nigel H.
On 12/6/16, 3:33 PM, "henrik.i...@gmail.com on behalf of Henrik Ingo" wrote: >The question isn't about patents or copyrights. The point is that taking >an OSI approved license and making additions to it by adding a separate >file

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread John Cowan
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Henrik Ingo wrote: Especially in this case, where it is debatable whether the patent > grant adds or removes rights compared to plain BSD. > Inevitably so, since the BSD license family either grants no patent rights (if you read it

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Henrik Ingo
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote: > On 12/5/16, 6:55 AM, "License-discuss on behalf of Henrik Ingo" > henrik.i...@avoinelama.fi> wrote: >>On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:26 AM, Richard Fontana

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-06 Thread Tzeng, Nigel H.
On 12/5/16, 6:55 AM, "License-discuss on behalf of Henrik Ingo" wrote: >On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:26 AM, Richard Fontana >wrote: >> - is it good practice, and does it affect the open source