Fwd: OSI approves CPAL at OSCON 2007

[Forrest J. Cavalier III]

David Woolley wrote:

> Forrest J. Cavalier III wrote:
> 
> 
>>Imagine Microsoft submits a Microsoft EULA, and then tacks on a safe
>>harbor of "These terms or the BSD but not the GPL."
> 
> 
> That's not possible, unless you mean the advertising clause version. 
> The current BSD is GPL compatible.

Agreed, but the hypothetical is not the "current BSD."  It is
instead "Restrictive EULA OR the BSD, but not the GPL"

A safe harbor term of "BSD but not the GPL" is not GPL compatible.
...but apparently "BSD but not the GPL" can be an OSI approved
license, since the approval can go with the safe-harbor interpretation
of "oh, it's the BSD."

[And it does no good to make up an OSI rule of "cannot discriminate
against other licenses" because the effect can be done using terms,
rather than naming the GPL by name.  I picked the example to make
the problem clear.]