[License-discuss] Evolving the License Review process for OSI

Bruce Perens bruce at perens.com
Mon May 27 23:49:50 UTC 2019

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:34 PM Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com> wrote:

> Pam, I said this to Bruce and the list: "Yes, OSI must do more to educate
> the public, but your remarks make our community stupid."

I have attempted to steer this discussion back to arguing about licenses,
and appreciate your participation in that, Larry, hopefully *without*
spending too much time on the fact I didn't choose your license for the set
I proposed.  But "your remarks make our community stupid" is really
difficult to parse as entirely without ad-hominem and offered only in a
constructive manner. And my confession of my academic background *wasn't an
invitation to pile on.*

(2) non-lawyers can and should comment about legal matters without at least
> respecting the good faith of the lawyers who drafted those other licenses.

In the security world we have a phrase "trust but verify".  A while back I
participated in an public round-table held by an online magazine in which
an attorney admitted to practice before the Supreme Court misrepresented
the law, as far as I can tell consciously, and I caught him at it. This was
confirmed by David McGowan, who was also participating and at the time was
dean of a law school. So, yes, attorneys do that from time to time, for
their own reasons.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190527/9b17bb47/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list