Slashdot Mirror


OSI Turns Down 4 Licenses; Approves Python Foundation's

Russ Nelson writes "The Open Source Initiative turned down four licenses this week. Not to name names, but one license had a restrictive patent grant that only applied to GPL'ed operating systems. Another was more of a rant than a license. Another was derived from the GPL in violation of the GPL's copyright. And the fourth had insufficient review on the license-discuss mailing list (archives). The one license that did pass was the Python Software Foundation License."

13 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. THE license by chachi8 · · Score: 4, Funny

    how do you think OSI feels about the definitive license?

    --
    ~~~ the problem as i see it is that i have absolutely no personality of my own.
  2. From the end of the PSF license: by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 4, Funny

    besides using all caps in an agreement/contract and triggering the lame lameness filter;

    ...OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION...


    All that legalease will keep most mortals a hare's breadth away from comprehending.

    I wonder if "tortious" action is like a gui user dropping back into his/her "shell"?

    {SEG} sorry for the bad puns...I can hear most of you going "tcsh-tcsh"...

    --
    Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
  3. Ummmm...thanks for the update by BillyGoatThree · · Score: 5, Informative

    In other news, I just had lunch. It was eggs with cheese, sausage and banana bread. Now I'm working on modifying the docs for the app I fixed. If you promise to keep me posted on what licenses OSI is rejecting, I'll promise to let you know when I get my hair cut.

    --
    324006
  4. Re:Wait a minute! by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you'd read the GPL, you would answer your own questions. The GPL is a copyrighted document that grants you explicit permission to redistribute it in unmodified form. Thus the GPLed software that includes the GPL license is obviously not in violation, as they are explicitly granted a right to distribute it. What is not granted is a right to modify the GPL itself. The reasoning for this was that if modification were allowed it would dilute the usefulness of the license, as "GPL-derived" licenses might not even be Free Software or Open Source.

    You can however provided added or amended licensing conditions without modifying the actual text of the GPL; for example "this program may be distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL with the added requirement that [blah blah]."

  5. Re:Hypocrisy by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, the entire reason the GPL exists is to promote Free Software; it's the GNU Foundation's opinion that allowing modification of the GPL would not work towards this goal. The main concern is that there would be a plethora of "GPL-derived" but not Open Source or Free Software licenses, thus diluting the usefulness of the license.

    The GPL is, in its essence, an ideological manifesto. Disallowing others from modifying your manifesto is not inconsistent with the GNU philosophy - the only thing they desire is that you allow others to modify your code, not your thoughts.

  6. WhooHoo! by Arandir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to name names, but one license had a restrictive patent grant that only applied to GPL'ed operating systems.

    And what a bizarre license that was (not to name names). It was essentially the BSD license word for word, with the aforementioned patent grant. Yet you couldn't legally use the software on a BSD licensed operating system.

    Another was more of a rant than a license.

    A delicious rant to be sure. I quite enjoyed it, despite its wrongheadedness. It could not be approved of course, since it explicitly denied its own validity.

    The one license that did pass was the Python Software Foundation License.

    Whoohoo! In this age of a million open source licenses, it's nice to see that a sensible license that fills a gap in open source gets approved while the frivolous crap gets flushed.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    1. Re:WhooHoo! by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Whoohoo! In this age of a million open source licenses, it's nice to see that a sensible license that fills a gap in open source gets approved while the frivolous crap gets flushed.

      I'm not denying that it fills a gap, but a cursory reading of the license doesn't seem to indicate to me what gap it's filling. Why was it not possible/desirable to license Python under one of the existing Free Software licenses, and instead necessary to come up with another one?

  7. Restrictive Patent Grant License by topeka · · Score: 5, Informative
    The restrictive patent grant license mentioned was probably the submission from Intel, which was a version of the BSD license with patent language added: From this e-mail:

    Intel modified the BSD license in the following ways:

    1. Intel made OPTIONAL the inclusion of a copyright notice (i.e., "Redistributions of source code of the Software may retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer").
    2. Intel added certain definitions derived from the patent license in the Common Public License, and added a license grant under certain Intel patents to distribute Intel software contributions, alone or as incorporated in any operating system licensed under the GPL (version 2.0 or later).
  8. Let's name some more names... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    errg, hit the submit button by mistake.

    The Poetic License

    states that:
    "The software covered by this license makes no claims about copyright, copyleft or even copy centre (where you take it down to the copy centre and copy it). Make as many copies as you want, for whatever purpose, even if it is to sacrifice those copies in a great floppy pyre. You may even claim copyright, ownership of trademark, originality or patent. You may even sue the real originator for a breach of your claimed copyright. However, this license can't guarantee that this will be in any way successful."
    (har de har har)

    The CMGPL
    The GPL without a bunch of sections? Which ones, you ask? Mostly the ones that don't count!

    The Intel BSD+Patent License
    Like BSD, but grants a patent license. Patent license is specifically not granted to use under non-GPL OS's, or with modified versions, although copyright license is the same as BSD.

  9. GPL by uslinux.net · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anyone besides me see the humor in the only FSF item which does *not* fall under the GPL is the GPL license itself :-)

  10. Artistic license by Spinality · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Artistic License is one I like. I'm always suspicious of an open source license that either a) has a polemical preamble that tries to coerce your behavior, b) reads like the team of lawyers who wrote the license are making a lot more money than the developers, or c) presumes that the only good programmer is one who either programs as a hobby, is an academic, works for a big company that can afford to subsidize the programmer's time, or works for an end-user company that can afford to build complex systems strictly for internal use -- in other words, that there's no moral way to be a software vendor.

    Yeah, I know there's plenty of room for argument all around, but my sympathies are with small software vendors who need some way to get enough revenue from 100-5000 licenses to pay salaries. The Artistic License strikes me as compact and commonsensical, and a good model for many situations. And of course it has the coolest name. :-)

    --
    -- We all have enough strength to endure the misfortunes of other people. La Rochefoucauld
  11. When will they approve the MGPL? by brer_rabbit · · Score: 5, Funny
    I don't know why more people don't use the MindGuard Public License (as used with MindGuard). An excerpt:
    A "work based on the Program" hereinafter means either the Program itself or a work containing a portion or the totality of the Program either with or without modifications, translations, transliterations, or transformations. (Hereinafter, the term "modification" shall include, without limitations, the last four terms of the previous sentence excluding the term "or" unless "or" is used to refer to a boolean function applied to modify the Program or any part of it.) Each licensee is addressed as "you", as in the statement "You are a licensee". (The statement "You are not a licensee" will hereinafter have no logical meaning.)
  12. My Standard Software Disclaimer by nbvb · · Score: 4, Funny

    This opinion is meant for educational purposes only. Any resemblance
    to real persons, living or dead is purley coincidental. Void where
    prohibited. Some assembly required. List each check separately by
    bank number. Batteries not included. Contents may settle during
    shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or
    implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy
    equipment. Postage will be paid by addressee. Subject to CAB
    approval. This is not an offer to sell securities. Apply only to
    affected area. May be too intense for some viewers. Do not stamp.
    Use other side for additional listings. For recreational use only.
    Do not disturb. All models over 18 years of age. If condition
    persists, consult your physician. No user-serviceable parts inside.
    Freshest if eaten before date on carton. Subject to change without
    notice. Times approximate. Simulated picture. No postage necessary
    if mailed in the United States. Breaking seal constitutes acceptance
    of agreement. For off-road use only. As seen on TV. One size fits
    all. Many suitcases look alike. Contains a substaintial amount of
    non-tobacco ingredients. Colors may, in time, fade. We have sent
    the forms which seem to be right for you. Slippery when wet. For
    in any mailbox. Edited for television. Keep cool; process promptly.
    Post office will not deliver without postage. List was current at
    time of printing. Return to sender, no forwarding order on file,
    unable to forward. Not responsible for direct, indirect, incidental
    or consequential damages resulting from any defect, error or failure
    to perform. At participating locations only. Not the Beatles.
    Penalty for private use. See label for sequence. Substantial
    penalty for early withdrawal. Do not write below this line. Falling
    rock. Lost ticket pays maximum rate. Your cancelled check is your
    recipt. Add toner. Place stamp here. Avoid contact with skin.
    Sanitized for your protection. Be sure each item is properly
    endorsed. Sign here without admitting guilt. Slightly higher west
    of the Mississippi. Employees and their families are not eligible.
    Beware of dog. Contestants have been briefed on some questions
    before the show. Limited time offer, call now to insure prompt
    delivery. You must be present to win. No passes accepted for this
    engagement. No purchase necessary. Processed at location stamped in
    code at top of carton. Shading within a garment may occur. Use only
    in well-ventilated area. Keep away from fire or flame. Replace with
    same type. Approved for veterans. Booths for two or more. Check
    here if tax deductible. Some equipment shown is optional. Price
    does not include taxes. No Canadian coins. Not recommended for
    children. Prerecorded for this time zone. Reproduction strictly
    prohibited. No solicitors. No alcohol, dogs, or horses. No
    anchovies unless otherwise specified. Restaurant package, not for
    resale. List at least two alternate dates. First pull up, then pull
    down. Call toll free before digging. Driver does not carry cash.
    Some of the trademarks mentioned in this product appear for
    identification purposes only. Record additional transactions on back
    of previous stub.

    This supersedes all previous notices.