[CAVO] Note from OSI-

[Brent Turner]

Though OSI is doing  good work--  they are a tad shy about entering this
national security fracas surrounding election system software licenses--

We did, however, receive this from them  recently-- and wanted to share-

Thoughts ?

BT




*Which Open Source license is best?*

Unlike bilateral copyright licenses, which are negotiated between two
parties and embody a truce between them for business purposes, multilateral
copyright licenses — of which open source licenses are a kind — are
“constitutions of communities”, as Eben Moglen and others have observed.
They express the consensus of how a community chooses to collaborate. They
also embody its ethical assumptions, even if they are not explicitly
enumerated.

When that consensus includes giving permission to all to use, study improve
and share the code without prejudice, the license is an open source
license. The Open Source Definition <http://opensource.org/definition> provides
an objective test of evaluating that such a license is indeed an open
source license and delivers the software freedom we all expect.

Since licenses are the consensus of communities, it is natural that
different communities will have different licenses, that communities with
different norms will find fault with the licenses used by others, and that
all will regard their way as optimum. The arguments over this will be as
deep as the gulf between the philosophical positions of the communities
involved.

Ultimately, there is no license that is right for every community. Use the
one that best aligns with your community’s objectives and ethos.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/cavo_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20160104/4b96e300/attachment.html>