For Approval: The Simplified BSD License

[Zak Greant]

On 9/7/07, David Woolley <forums at david-woolley.me.uk> wrote:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
>
> I don't like the word "Simplified". It has connotations of dumbing down.
>   I think BSD Licence without Endorsements Clause would be much clearer.

Ticketed as https://osi.osuosl.org/ticket/50

>
> > All rights reserved.
>
> Maybe I don't understand this phrase (IANAL), but it seems to me that
> the whole point of the BSD style licence is to un-reserve many rights!
> Creative Commons use of the phrase "some rights reserved" seems to be
> consistent with my interpretation.  On my interpretation, this makes the
> result self contradictory and therefore potentially void.

I am not ticketing this issue.

> > THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
>
> CONTRIBUTORS needs defining.  In my view, the warranty disclaimer should
> only be imposed in relation to those persons that are listed in the
> associated list of copyright owners.  With BSD style licencing, it
> should be possible for someone to contribute to create a proprietary
> fork and give some warranties (even though most software vendors would
> rather not give warranties).

I am not ticketing this issue.

While I typically would, these are both well-understood issues and the
license needs to be approved (or not) as it is.

-- 
Cheers!
--zak