Approval request, DSPL v1.1

Julian Hall jules at
Sat Oct 13 13:24:32 UTC 2001

[ Please review this license.  -russ ]

Following comments I received on version 1.0 of the DSPL, I have
prepared a revision for submission for approval.

Major modifications for this revision are:

- clarification (as per discussion with Bradley Kuhn) that restrictions
on spending of money earned under section 7 apply only to money raised
by relicensing the Software or donated to the Committee and do not
restrict any freedoms that any parties would have without the license.
- GPL equivalence clause added (4.4)

Having quickly scanned the archives of the license discussion mailing
list I can't find much reference from when I submitted version 1.0, but
I did note that there was some concern about the license requiring the
committee to be an incorporated body.  Although I have not specifically
consulted over this issue, I am aware that under English law at least
non-incorporated bodies are free to act in this fashion (being similar
to the formation of a club or society), at least for as long as they do
not derive an over-all profit from their activities, and the latter is
only due to taxation issues.  The license, I believe, makes it clear
that taxation issues must be resolved by any individuals concerned.

With respect to the questions on your web site, these are answered here:

Put the license on a web page in HTML form. We will convert it into the
same style as the existing approved licenses. You can help us by
publishing it in that style yourself to save us the conversion step.

     The license is available at  I have not converted it to
     exactly the form you use, but the
     conversion should be trivial, and I will perform this for you
     if you wish

Tell us which existing OSI-approved license is most similar to your

     Due to clause 4.4, the GPL, as this is intended as a dual
     license to go alongside the GPL

Explain why that license will not suffice for your needs.

     The DSPL is intended to allow commercial relicensing while
     assuring developers that they will retain both control over
     how their code is used, and that any profits from commercial
     exploitation will be used in a manner that is fair.

Explain how software distributed under your license can be used in
conjunction with software distributed under other open source licenses.
Which license do you think will take precedence for derivative or
combined works? Is there any software license that is entirely
incompatible with your proposed license?.

     The DSPL is GPL compatible, and allows relicensing under GPL
     so that DSPL projects can be easily combined with GPL code  It
     also includes provisions allowing it to be used to produce
     libraries that can be linked with code under other licenses
     and distributed in binary form in a manner similar to the
     LGPL.  DSPL code could not, however, be incorporated into an
     LGPL, BSD, MIT or similarly licensed project (although only
     LGPL is anticipated to cause problems, due to the openness of
     the latter licenses).

I look forward to receiving your comments!

Julian Hall

license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list