Three new proposed OSD terms

[Chuck Swiger]

Russell Nelson wrote:
[ ... ]
> Not true.  Martin Fink has a problem at HP.  He can only deploy
> software if HP's IT department has approved the license.  Every new
> license makes his job that much harder.

OK, so far.

> He's understandably upset that an organization he has no control over (OSI)
> is making his life harder.

This is nonsense.  :-)  If the OSI board refused to approve any new licenses, 
would that do one bit of good with regard to Martin Fink's problem?

The OSI board isn't creating new licenses, nor is it creating the software 
that HP wants to use and putting it under a new license.

The authors of software have the right to license their creative work under 
terms which are pleasing to them.  People who want to use and redistribute 
other people's software have an obligation to understand and agree to the 
terms of the license for this software.

This was true before the OSD and the OSI existed, it will still be true 
regardless of whether or how the OSD changes, and it will also be true 
regardless of whether a particular license receives OSI certification or not.

> I don't blame him for being unhappy; I just wish that he had
> approached us directly rather than attacking us as if we were the
> enemy.  I mean, I had to hear from reporters that he was unhappy and
> dissing OSI!  That's totally whacked.  Not at all how you would expect
> a vice president of a Fortune 500 company to behave.

Last I checked, even the executives at Fortune 500 companies are human...

-- 
-Chuck