[License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: U.S. Army Research Laboratory Open Source License (ARL OSL) Version 0.4.1

Mon Feb 27 18:57:09 UTC 2017

I've forwarded your frustrations onwards; I don't know what the response will 
be.

Thanks,
Cem Karan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lawrence Rosen [mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 1:43 PM
> To: license-discuss at opensource.org; Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) 
> <cem.f.karan.civ at mail.mil>
> Cc: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com>
> Subject: RE: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: U.S. Army Research 
> Laboratory Open Source License (ARL OSL) Version 0.4.1
>
> All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the 
> identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links
> contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a 
> Web browser.
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> Cem Karan wrote:
>
> > As for our legal counsel posting to this list directly, they've told me in 
> > the past that they won't do that because it violates some statute
> or contract clause[1].
>
> [1] I'm not sure what exactly, they've explained it to me, but I keep 
> forgetting the finer details.
>
>
>
> I apologize for again writing to you, Cem, since you are doing a great job 
> at this thread, but it is the only way I know to get my message to
> your attorneys:
>
>
>
> Their behavior in funneling their license to this public list via a 
> non-lawyer is insulting to those of us on this list who are lawyers and who
> well understand the law of copyright and open source. They are also 
> insulting the non-lawyers on this list who know more about open
> source licenses than most lawyers in your government agency apparently do. 
> Please ask them to talk to us as professionals.
>
>
>
> As far as some "statute or contract clause" that would prevent a lawyer from 
> justifying his or her own submission of a license to this
> public open source mail list, I doubt that!
>
>
>
> I am personally so frustrated at this unnecessary barrier that I might file 
> a FOIA request to force them to speak up publicly about their
> public legal issue that concerns all of us who use the Apache license with 
> public domain components in our software. That's not the way
> the open source community works out such issues.
>
>
>
> /Larry
>
>
>
> Lawrence Rosen
>
> Rosenlaw (Caution-www.rosenlaw.com)
>
> 3001 King Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482
>
> Cell: 707-478-8932
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: License-discuss 
> [Caution-mailto:license-discuss-bounces at opensource.org] On Behalf Of Karan, 
> Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL
> (US)
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 10:10 AM
> To: lrosen at rosenlaw.com; license-discuss at opensource.org
> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: U.S. Army Research 
> Laboratory Open Source License (ARL OSL) Version 0.4.1
>
>
>
> I've forwarded your question to our internal counsel, and I'm hoping to get 
> a message back in a day or two.  I'll post it when they get back
> to me.
>
>
>
> As for our legal counsel posting to this list directly, they've told me in 
> the past that they won't do that because it violates some statute or
> contract clause[1].  So, I apologize if I have to act as a filter, but that 
> is the best I can do at the moment.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cem Karan
>
>
>
> [1] I'm not sure what exactly, they've explained it to me, but I keep 
> forgetting the finer details.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: Lawrence Rosen [Caution-mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com < 
> > Caution-mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com > ]
>
> > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 12:50 PM
>
> > To: Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)
>
> > <cem.f.karan.civ at mail.mil < Caution-mailto:cem.f.karan.civ at mail.mil > >; 
> > license-discuss at opensource.org < Caution-mailto:license-
> discuss at opensource.org >
>
> > Cc: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com < 
> > Caution-mailto:lrosen at rosenlaw.com > >
>
> > Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [License-discuss] U.S. Army Research
>
> > Laboratory Open Source License (ARL OSL) Version 0.4.1
>
> >
>
> > All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify
>
> > the identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links
>
> > contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address
>
> > to a Web browser.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ________________________________
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Cem Karan wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > I'm not a lawyer, I'm not your lawyer, I don't pretend to be one on
>
> > > TV or anywhere else, and nothing I say should be construed as legal
>
> > advice.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > In that situation, it would be unfair to ask you my question directly,
>
> > so please forward my email directly to your lawyer(s). I'd like to
>
> > hear from them directly or on this list.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Cem Karan wrote:
>
> >
>
> > . . . the truly serious issue is severability
>
> > Caution-Caution-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severability < Caution-
>
> > Caution-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severability < 
> > Caution-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severability >  > ).  The concern is 
> > that
>
> > if the USG uses a license that depends on copyright (e.g., Apache
>
> > 2.0), and those clauses are declared unenforceable by the courts, then
>
> > it may be possible to declare the entire license unenforceable.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Larry Rosen asked:
>
> >
>
> > Apache-licensed software also may (and frequently does) contain public
>
> > domain components. Are you suggesting that "severability" is a
>
> > potential problem with Apache software?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > /Larry
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Lawrence Rosen
>
> >
>
> > Rosenlaw (Caution-Caution-www.rosenlaw.com)
>
> >
>
> > 3001 King Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482
>
> >
>
> > Cell: 707-478-8932
>
>

-------------- 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/20170227/98b1bc0b/attachment.p7s>