Thoughts on the CAM Open Source License?

donheff asks: "The General Services Administration (where I work) recently released a certificate arbitrator module (CAM) under an open source license drafted by GSA and Mitretek. GSA and Mitretek will serve as the license reviewers and will modify it as appropriate. I was not involved in drafting the license but may poke my nose into future developments. I am interested in what Slashdot readers think of the terms and conditions of this agreement and what they think belongs in Government open source licenses. Full text of the license is available here." Word of warning, the previous link is in .DOC format, so you may want to fire up those converters. It's nice seeing the Government finally trying to embrace Open Source, however are there any "gotcha!"s in this license that we should worry about?

Comments

doc - txt

[Leknor]

Here is a txt version from wordpad, you'll want word wrap in your text editor. If Y! doesn't allow direct links use this.

GPL like but not

[Leknor]

Section 3.2.2 says:

Source Code Distributor may not offer or impose any terms on any Source Code of a Contributor Version that alters or restricts the applicable version of this Agreement or the licensees' rights under this Agreement; except that Source Code Distributor may offer, and charge a fee [....]

As far as I can tell the intentions are the same as the GPL. (That any code that uses this code must use this licence.) If so then their is a small problem in that this isn't the GPL and since GPL requires uses of the GPL and CAM OSL requires use of the CAM OSL then GPL and CAM OLS code cannot be used together despite what I read to be similar intentions.

Either allow dual license with GPL and/or some others or be more like the LGPL (which is my favorite license btw.) which doesn't try to extend it's restrictions into other code (as much as the GPL)

Oh yea, I'm not a lawyer, I don't even claim to be smart.

First troll baby!

[Anonymous Coward]

w00t. You fuckin' heard me: w00t.