openbravo license: another variant of the MPL

Richard Fontana rfontana at
Tue Apr 26 12:42:29 UTC 2011

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 08:26:03AM -0400, Michael Tiemann wrote:
> I hate to be the one to stir the pot and suggest yet another open source
> license for review, so I'm writing to license-discuss first, not
> license-review.  The openbravo license (
> license.html) clearly sits much closer to the Mozilla Public License (MPL)
> version 1.1 than does the CPAL, which the OSI has approved.  If law really was
> like code, then one could argue mathematically that a license that properly
> sits between two approved licenses should be implicitly approved.  But that's
> not how things have historically worked for the OSI, at least not at a form
> process level.
> I would like to use and recommend openbravo, but feel conflicted about the
> license's non-approved status.
> WTF (What's the fix)?
> Another license to be approved?
> More progress on license templatization?
> A theory of approval continuity (i.e., a license that sits properly between two
> approved licenses is approved)?

Isn't Appendix B of the Openbravo license precisely the sort of
problematic 'badgeware' provision that was so controversial in
~2006-2007?  CPAL contained certain clauses that addressed the defects
of earlier badgeware licenses, which I don't see here -- for example,
allowing for the possibility that it might be technically impossible
to display the graphical logo as specified.

- RF

Richard E. Fontana
Open Source Licensing and Patent Counsel
Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the License-discuss mailing list