<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body ><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div style="font-size:100%">Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab®|PRO</div></div><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Richard Fontana <fontana@sharpeleven.org> <br>Date:09/15/2015 8:54 AM (GMT-08:00) <br>To: License submissions for OSI review <license-review@opensource.org> <br>Subject: Re: [License-review] [Was: Submission of OSET Public License for
Approval] -- National Security and Public Policy (3.5B and 4) <br><br>On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 02:34:06AM +0000, Meeker, Heather J. wrote:<br>> § 3.5B Application of Additional Terms. We allowed additional conditions<br>> specifically to address national security or public interest concerns as well<br>> as state and federal procurement regulations. This is an important aspect of<br>> the unique target audience for this license – federal, state, county, and/or<br>> municipal elections administration agencies.<br>> <br>> § 4 Inability to Comply Due to Statute or Regulation. We added national<br>> security and necessity of public interest to the list of circumstances due to<br>> which the licensee may be unable to comply with the terms of the license. <br><br>Is OSET contemplating that software distributed under the OSET Public<br>License along with section 3.5 B conditions will be in all cases<br>describable as 'Open Source', assuming approval of the OSET PL by the<br>OSI?<br><br>I'm a little concerned about the potential for commercially-motivated<br>open-washing here.<br><br>Richard<br>_______________________________________________<br>License-review mailing list<br>License-review@opensource.org<br>https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review<br></body>