Groklaw's OSI item (was: When will CPAL actually be _used_?)
brian at hyperreal.org
Wed Aug 22 20:25:02 UTC 2007
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Cinly Ooi wrote:
> Microsoft should not be discriminated simply because it is Microsoft, nor
> should it be given special treatment if it is Microsoft.
I agree with that.
> My view is if the licenses satisfy OSI rules on Open Source and License
> Proliferation, it should by default be approved. Otherwise, OSI can and
> should be stand accused of anti-Microsoft.
I agree. I suppose my prior question about proliferation could be
answered by understanding specifically what the policy is - how much
substantive difference is required in order to justify a new license, etc.
I don't know if it's like the Supreme Court's definition of smut, "we know
it when we see it", or something that can be articulated, turned into a
term of the OSD, etc.
> Microsoft, like any other submitters, should be cautioned that its
> certification will be pulled if it twist the truth or behave in any manner
> that is detriment to OSI's objective.
I think that goes way too far. AFAIK, OSI has never "pulled" the
certification of any license, even ones that in retrospect probably should
not have been approved, let alone one based on the actions of the license
steward. Imagine the chaos it could cause for third parties who choose
to use that certified license and then are told, probably without much
warning, that it's no longer Open Source - purely due to actions beyond
their control, and not because the license itself fails some OSD test.
Imagine the burden it places on OSI of having to arbitrate not just
licensing policy but the "Open Source truthfulness" of any submitting
organization - for all time. OSI's been a fine platform for airing issues
related to this - publishing the Halloween documents, for example - but I
don't think pulling a certification for bad behavior would be an
appropriate use of its power. I've not even addressed whether such a
thing is legal for a certification body or mark, or a 501c3, either.
More information about the License-discuss