[License-discuss] Nov. 2019 License-Discuss & License-Review Summaries

Patrick Masson masson at opensource.org
Wed Dec 18 22:28:38 UTC 2019

Hello everyone,
In November 2019, topics on the License-Discuss mailing list included
best practices for embedding Apache v2 software, a request for public
comment on OpenChain, and processes for transitioning code to Public
Domain, while the License-Review mailing list members did not hold any
discussions over the course of the month. Once again, we would like to
thank Amol Meshram, who has joined us here at the OSI to provide these
monthly summaries of both the License-Discuss and License-Review
mailing lists. If you have any feedback, please let us know.
1. How to embed Apache v2 software?
Antoine Thomas was seeking help on how to embed, re-distribute
libraries (unmodified), license software and ship under the Open
Software License (“OSL”).  To this Kevin P Fleming responded the
developer shall distribute source code of software with its licenses,
provide copyright notice and adhere to terms and conditions of ‘other’
included software. Florian Weimer is of the opinion that by shipping
the entire input to the build system, license compliance will be
easier. Lawrence Rosen thinks a developer can aggregate Apache V2 and
OSL code, as only the derivative works of the OSL must be released
under the OSL and Apache doesn’t care. Gustavo G. Mármol is of the
opinion that a license should be interpreted based on the jurisdiction
of the business entity.
2. Why will no-one sue GrSecurity for their blatant GPL violation (of
GCC and the linux kernel)?
This email addressed to “RMS” was misdirected to the OSI list. The
sender was directed to the Free Software Foundation.
3. Seeking public comments for the OpenChain specification ISO format
version 2.1:
Gisi, Mark announced that drafting of OpenChain Specification version
2.1 will be conclude on December 10th, if anyone has suggestion please
feel free to contact.
4. Becoming Public Domain After X Years:
Martin L is interested in knowing about licenses which allow the
developer to release code after X years? David Woolley replies that
validity of putting content in the public domain depends on the
jurisdiction. John Cowan points out that under Copyright Act there is
no specific provision for copyright abandonment, but, in general
property can be abandoned by overt act. Thorsten Glaser said that some
countries do not recognized the public domain and suggested using a
permissive license after X years, with an example of “the first 10
years license A, then license B.” Antoine Thomas asks Thotsten Glaser
whether a combination of CC-0 & BSL can be used in such cases? Richard
Fontana compared the given situation with the ‘copyleft sunset’
provision of the copyleft-next 0.3.1 license, wherein the copyleft
provision of the license ceases to apply 15 years after the
distribution of the initial work.

  ||  |   | || |  ||  ||  | || |  |||  |  |||  

Patrick Masson
General Manager & Director, Open Source Initiative
855 El Camino Real, Ste 13A, #270
Palo Alto, CA 94301
United States
Office: (415) 857-5398
Mobile: (970) 4MASSON
Freenode: OSIMasson
Email: masson at opensource.org
Website: www.opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20191218/6b1987f6/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list