Off Topic: DMAware Model for Open-Source Development and Distribution

[InfoNuovo at cs.com]

I believe this is off-topic for this list, in that an open-source license is
not being presented for approval.

I am making this information available for that subset of recipients here
who find interest in overall efforts to create models / frameworks for
open-source development and distribution.  And I am interested in feedback
from that community.

I am happy to move further discussion to another list, and I'm willing to
have discussions in private e-mail absent a more-public alternative.

BACKGROUND

I have been working to arrive at a model for open-source distribution and
development for software and specifications that were initially developed by
the AIIM Document Management Alliance, a trade-association, membership-based
coalition (http://www.aiim.org/dma).

Draft 0.03 of the model now being discussed is available for inspection and
review at

    http://www.infonuovo.com/DMAware/dmaware003.htm.

APPROACH TO DIFFERENTIATION

I am bringing this to the attention of this list because of the
differentiation among degrees of open-source license I am looking at:

1.  Simple Open-Source Licenses, ones which do not require that derivative
works be distributed under the same license (i.e., honor OSD 1.7 item 3 and
let that be it except for any notice, acknowledgment, and separability
requirements).

2.  General Open-Source Licenses, ones which broadly require that derivative
works be distributed under the same license (e.g., the GPL).

3.  Open-Source Library/Component Licenses that limit the kinds of works that
must be distributed under the same license, whether or not other works would
be found to be derivative works under copyright law.  (I put the LGLP in
this category.)

My general approach is to recommend acceptance of all Open-Source Certified
works for the DMAware clearinghouse, but to encourage form #1, especially
for the initial material to be "rolled-over" to open source from the work of
the Document Management Alliance.

I must confess that while form #3 is intriguing for me, I find it to be the
most problematic.  My measure of success here is that there be an easy
practical statement for what constitutes a derivative subject to the
requirement of distribution under the same license, so that users of
libraries and components can easily and confidently avoid infringement,
being free to make broad application of the library or component.  Absent
such clarity, I for one would rely on form #1 rather than a specimen license
in category #3.

The web page provides more rationale and puts this inside of a model for
distribution, archiving, and development.

-- Dennis

------------------
Dennis E. Hamilton
InfoNuovo
mailto:infonuovo at email.com
tel. +1-206-779-9430 (gsm)
fax. +1-425-793-0283
http://www.infonuovo.com