APL license - What about the enforced logos?

Matt Asay mjasay at gmail.com
Mon Nov 13 16:25:44 UTC 2006

You can submit one, Nick, but be advised that one of the companies currently
using an attribution license is planning to submit theirs.  So, you may just
want to wait (though I like the title of yours :-).

From: Nicholas Goodman <ngoodman at bayontechnologies.com>
Reply-To: <ngoodman at bayontechnologies.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:18:32 -0800
To: David Woolley <david at djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Cc: <license-discuss at opensource.org>
Subject: Re: APL license - What about the enforced logos?

There are several licenses which use this Exhibit B all claiming to be open
source companies, products, etc.  None of them have submitted their licenses
for approval to my knowledge.  Is it possible to submit their license on
their behalf so there can be an actual determination?

If not, can I submit my own license?  Ie, just like they all use the same
Exhibit B template can I submit a license "ForcedAttributionCompany Public
License" with the Exhibit B for determination?

IMHO, they are not.  There is a very broad audience now buying into these
"apps" as open source; these additions to the open source community are not
as educated as those on the infrastructure side.  It seems the very people
that could use an OSI service most (newbie open source USERs) would benefit
greatly from a determination from OSI on the Exhibit B's of the world.

Please let me know if I can prepare a license for submission
"ForcedAttributionCompany Public License."  I know it is strange to submit a
license with an expectation it be rejected but the outcome remains just as
important (determining if Exhibit B meets OSD or not).

Kind Regards,

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20061113/a8fe0b8b/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list