[License-discuss] [Osi] [General enquiries] Dual License for CC0

[Wilson, Andrew]

Kuno Woud wrote:

> On 04/01/2014 10:44 PM, Wilson, Andrew wrote:
>> In a legal system where PD is not recognized, e.g. Europe, then the 
>> effective portion of CC0 is presumably not the PD declaration but the 
>> permissive license.  As other posters have noted, that permissive license is not perceptibly different in effect from MIT.
>
> MIT is OSI approved, CC0 is not.
>
> Which in itself may be important to some users.  For example all projects hosted on code.google.com are required by Google to use an OSI approved license.

Hi, Kuno.  A quick search of code.google.com for "public domain" gets 633 hits.  So, maybe Google isn't exactly literal in its
interpretation of OSI-approved?

Interesting point, though.  I'd speculate that if the embedded "public license fallback" inside CC0 is ever sent to OSI as a
stand-alone license, it would be approved.  It is mighty similar in effect to MIT/BSD/Apache, with the distinctive
feature that it explicitly disclaims patent licensing, is clearly copyright-only,  and therefore non-duplicative.

Andy Wilson
Intel open source technology center