[Fwd: [gnu.org #285277] Open Source Initiative Certification for GPL 3.0]

Matthew Garrett mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
Fri Apr 28 11:58:59 UTC 2006

On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 05:54:00PM -0400, Russ Nelson wrote:
> Zak Greant writes:
>  > No need to fuel the fire here. Both FSF and OSI are relevant. Dave  
>  > doesn't really follow what the OSI does,
> It's not that Dave is ignorant of what the OSI does.  It's that Dave
> said something lacking in simple logic.  How can the OSI be irrelevant
> BECAUSE too many people are asking for license approvals?

While true, I'd suggest that

a) the fact that license-proliferation archive suggests that there's 
been no activity since last September, and 
b) nobody seems interested in discussing where boundaries should be 
drawn when it comes to patent-related license termination

are more suggestive of a lack of contemporary relevance. Who is actually 
taking the lead on establishing community standards? The FSF are doing 
their GPL3 thing, but OSI don't seem to be doing much other than 
approving the odd license according to standards that were written 
several years ago.

Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org

More information about the License-discuss mailing list