Question on OSD #5

[Arnoud Engelfriet]

David Woolley wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> >Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
> >>With respect to OSD #5 do folks believe that releasing under an OSI
> >>approved license but having to mark the software as FOUO (For Official Use
> >>Only) or SECRET breaks OSD #5?
> >
> >Interesting. I think you would have to look at the actual license terms
> >of the applicable OSI-certified licenses instead of just the OSD.
> >For e.g. MIT-licensed material this should not be an issue.
> 
> Only because you can create works whose overall licence is OSD 
> non-compliant.  I think that the proposed term would violate the fields 
> of endeavour rule (although normally people would try it on the other 
> way, i.e. restricting to non-military use).

That would apply only if you made the FOUO restriction part of
the software license. If you give me BSD software and additionally
make me sign an NDA that says I won't redistribute it, the software
still is BSD. I just can't distribute it. 

The same goes for GPL software, although there the NDA also triggers
the "no additional restrictions" clause.

Arnoud

-- 
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
              Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/