AW: For Approval: German Free Software License

[Axel Metzger]

Hello Russell, hello list,

Russell Nelson wrote:

>Chuck Swiger writes:
>> Although the terms are close in meaning, neither the Free Software
>> Foundation nor the OSI board would consider "free software" and
>> "open source software" to be synonyms.  For example, the OSI board
>> has approved some licenses which are not compatible with the GPL's
>> definition of "free software".
>
>s/GPL/FSF/, and I would note that that particular issue is very
>controversial.  It's nowhere near agreed-upon by everyone involved.
>
>> This version of the license ought to have a version #, too, then.
>
>Yes, it should.

I already agreed when answering Chucks e-mail. We will insert a version
number.

>> >> The new version of the License becomes binding for
>> >> you as soon as you become aware of its publication. Legal remedies
>> >> against the modification of the License are not restricted by the
>> >> regulations described above.
>> 
>> I would suggest handling this the way the GPL does; ie, the user
>> may choose to accept the new version of the license at their
>> option, not as a requirement.
>
>Yes!  We cannot approve the license with this term in it, since you
>could take away someone's rights to redistribute the software.

Even if a version number is inserted? I do not see the point. We already
discussed that issue, please check my remarks in the messages 51 and 52 in
this thread. 

>> I have strong doubts about the validity of an open-ended license
>> which may be altered or changed by one party without notification
>> or acceptance on the part of the other party.
>
>Yes, but don't forget that they're writing this for German law, which
>may allow this (hopefully not).

Please check message 51. I answered already to this point.

Best regards

Axel