[License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: OSI equivalent

[Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Sullivan [mailto:johns at fsf.org]
> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 10:10 AM
> To: Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) <cem.f.karan.civ at mail.mil>
> Cc: license-discuss at opensource.org
> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: OSI equivalent
>
> "Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)" <cem.f.karan.civ at mail.mil>
> writes:
>
> > --===============0423943140736445875==
> > Content-Language: en-US
> > Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature";
> > 	micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00EE_01D28833.18234540"
> >
> > ------=_NextPart_000_00EE_01D28833.18234540
> > Content-Type: text/plain;
> > 	charset="utf-8"
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > Beyond that, is the FSF interested in compatibility between non-FSF 
> > licenses?
> > That is, if MIT and Apache 2.0 happened to be incompatible with one
> > another, would FSF care provided they were both compatible with the
> > GPL?  In my opinion, OSI is supposed to be more neutral on the
> > matters, and therefore should care more about such situations.
> >
>
> I can't immediately picture the specific situation you're talking about, but 
> in general we do care. For one thing because we recommend
> other licenses depending on the situation (see 
> Caution-https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.en.html).
>
> We also do support all free software, not just GPLed or even just copyleft 
> free software. Our licensing at fsf.org team answers questions
> that have to do with other licenses in both their correspondence with the 
> community and in our compliance work.

OK, so FSF is willing to take this on for OSI?  Will OSI defer to FSF on this? 
Ideally there will always be one canonical source of information for license 
compatibility so that there isn't any confusion.

Thanks,
Cem Karan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6419 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20170216/a4fa5848/attachment.p7s>