For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License

[Matthew Flaschen]

Jon Rosenberg (PBM) wrote:
> When I committed in my last posting to consulting the community on
> future license revisions, I really wasn't expecting that I'd be doing
> it this week. :-)

Thank you for your prompt response.

> We have also sought feedback from the hundreds
> of licensors who are using the Microsoft licenses today.  They told
> us something quite different: that the Community License name did not
> adequately communicate the fact that this license was reciprocal.

I would agree with that, though I don't think there's any set meaning
for a "community license", so nobody would be misled.

> I would like to get all of your feedback on the following name
> revisions: 
> *       Microsoft Community License becomes Microsoft  Reciprocal License
> *       Microsoft Permissive License becomes Microsoft Open License I look forward to your feedback.

I think both of those are good names.  Microsoft Reciprocal License is
very clear about the intention.  Though Microsoft Open License is a bit
vague, that's okay.  We have plenty of vague names already (Apache
License, General Public License, Artistic License, etc.).  That just
encourages people to read the license (or a good summary) before making
assumptions.  And since Microsoft Open License is OSD-compliant, the
"Open" itself isn't misleading.

Matt Flaschen