First Post / Question Regarding CPOL 1.02
chuck at codefab.com
Mon Oct 5 20:02:32 UTC 2009
On Oct 5, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Joe Bell wrote:
> My question is regarding the Code Project Open License (http://www.codeproject.com/info/cpol10.aspx
> ) and whether or not anyone has done a “rigorous” analysis of it - I
> did notice that it isn’t an OSI-approved open source license, but
> the fact is that it does cover quite a variety of useful C# and .NET
> projects on the Code Project website and I’d be interested to learn
> other’s opinions on any gotchas and/or loopholes in this license.
Welcome. We haven't done a formal review of that license, as we
normally only consider licenses which have been submitted for review
by their authors as part of the normal process.
Just offhand, it's not compliant with the OSD #1 due to clause 5d:
"You agree not to sell, lease, or rent any part of the Work. This does
not restrict you from including the Work or any part of the Work
inside a larger software distribution that itself is being sold. The
Work by itself, though, cannot be sold, leased or rented."
Clause 5f also runs into problems with OSD #5 & #6; for example, the
author might feel that using the software to develop a weapon is
immoral, but the OSD does not permit the license to discriminate
against that or any field of endeavor. Or the author might feel that
using the software on a website which promotes Hinduism (or Judaism,
Christianity, etc) is immoral....
Such clauses in a license-- ie, forbidding one to use the licensed
material for illegal purposes-- are generally not useful, as local law
determines what is licit or not, and terms in a license cannot
override that anyway.
More information about the License-discuss