License Committee Report
Jan.Dockx at peopleware.be
Mon Nov 8 20:52:14 UTC 2004
On 8 Nov 2004, at 8:35h, Russell Nelson wrote:
> I'm the chair of the license approval committee. This is my report
> for the current set of licenses under discussion. If anybody
> disagrees with my assessment of the committee's conclusions, say so
> Title: Academic Citing License
> License: in the submission.
> Comments: Stephen C. North, among others, agrees with me that the
> requirement to cite the software is a restriction on use rather than
> distribution. Since we very much want to keep that camel's nose out
> of the tent, we should reject this license, well-intentioned though
> it is.
> Recommend: rejection.
I for one, don't agree with this assessment. The issue of the submitter
is real, and doesn't impose on the
spirit of Open Source. More to the point, I think that the license does
not impose a restriction on use,
but it does impose a restriction on the _distribution_ of the data and
results gained from using the
software. I believe the difference is significant. This issue doesn't
differ significantly from the "obnoxious
BSD advertising clause"-issue of the original BSD license, and the
original BSD license is approved obviously.
I ask the committee to take a second look at this issue.
More information about the License-discuss