Is the OpenMap license Open Source?

John Cowan jcowan at
Wed Nov 20 15:27:06 UTC 2002

Colin 't Hart scripsit:

> At it is claimed that
> the OpenMap(TM) package is Open Source. Wandering
> over to I find this claim no
> longer means what it used to, and that it doesn't
> mean that much if it doesn't say 'OSI Certified'.

Well, it can't be trademarked.  But it has plenty of meaning to the

> I was wondering if OpenMap's license
> (
> was being considered by OSI for certification?

Probably not, but anyone can propose it, even you.  Of course, if OSI
wants modifications, you won't be able to make them.

> In particular I'm not sure what some clauses entail
> (such as clauses 3 and 9)

3 says that BBN gets to reuse any derivative works you make, even ones
that are closed-source to everyone else; it's an asymmetry clause similar
to the one in the NPL.

9 just says that you agree that the stuff you contribute as your source code
really is your source code and doesn't belong to someone else, like your

> and whether there is
> anything that's in this license that would be
> an impediment to OSI certification?

I see nothing (IANAL, TINLA, IANAOSI).

> Such certification would give me the peace-of-mind
> that it is worth creating derivative works of
> software under this license.

The license is a variant of the Artistic License used for Perl.

Long-short-short, long-short-short / Dactyls in dimeter,
Verse form with choriambs / (Masculine rhyme):  jcowan at
One sentence (two stanzas) / Hexasyllabically
Challenges poets who / Don't have the time.     --robison who's at texas dot net
license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list