Question regarding a new local license approach

Fabian Bastin Fabian.Bastin at
Thu Mar 10 15:55:13 UTC 2005


IMHO, such local issues are important, since the way a license is 
interpreted may vary following the national and international 
legislations, and so we can face annoying legal issues. I therefore take 
the liberty to transmit the following link for informational purposes: It is an attempt to 
develop an open-source license that would cover the european community 
legal issues.

I am not involved in the process, so I can not give you more details, 
but I can transmit email addresses from some of the authors.



Walter van Holst wrote:

>X-FUNDP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
>X-imss-version: 2.19
>X-imss-result: Passed
>X-imss-scores: Clean:99.90000 C:2 M:3 S:5 R:5
>X-imss-settings: Baseline:3 C:2 M:2 S:2 R:2 (0.0500 0.0500)
>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:17:04 -0500, Chuck Swiger <chuck at> wrote:
>>If local law says an agreement or contract needs to have certain
>>properties to be valid, yet the license tries to disclaim one of those
>>things, the situation becomes unclear and may require a judge to make a
>>decision if there is a dispute.  And there is no point to risking a
>>decision you don't like if you can avoid the ambiguity by writing a
>>license which is not inherently questionable under your legal codes.
>Having a license that is not inherently questionable under Dutch law
>is precisely the main reason I am asking on this list whether local
>versus US law issues would be acceptable reasons for OSI to have yet
>another license certified. Several governmental clients of mine would
>like to get it right, getting it right is of limited use however if it
>doesn't gain acceptance by the OSS community. I would like to hear
>from those involved in certification decisions whether they are
>willing to consider such a local license for certification, any
>imminent cull of the OSI-herd notwithstanding.
> Walter

More information about the License-discuss mailing list