AW: For Approval: German Free Software License
metzger at mpipriv-hh.mpg.de
Wed Nov 24 15:16:09 UTC 2004
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
>> >> 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
>> 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.
More information about the License-discuss