[License-discuss] "Fairness" vs. mission objectives

[John Cowan]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:08 AM Eric S. Raymond <esr at thyrsus.com> wrote:

The analogy [with UL] is exact.


Not quite.  If we found out that the license did not meet the OSD's
requirements, it would indeed be our duty to decertify it.  However, goals
like "minimize license proliferation" are less clear-cut.   Saying that a
license should not have been certified because it is redundant to some
other license does not entail that it should be decertified now.

This is not quite stare decisis, which is the rule that (where possible)
similar cases should be decided similarly: it is a matter of not disturbing
existing relationships.  There are now many forges and archives that accept
code under any OSI-certified license.  They should not have to purge code
under a decertified license without very good cause indeed.

(another email)

denying the use of open-source code


As this discussion has repeatedly noted, the use of the code is not
*denied*.  It is simply made more embarrassing.  The issues are with the
effects on third parties.

The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion
>         -- George Washington & John Adams, in a diplomatic message to
> Malta.
>

An ambassador is an honest man who is sent to lie abroad for the good of
his country.  --Henry Wotton



John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
"The serene chaos that is Courage, and the phenomenon of Unopened
Consciousness have been known to the Great World eons longer than
Extaboulism."
"Why is that?" the woman inquired.
"Because I just made that word up", the Master said wisely.
        --Kehlog Albran, The Profit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200224/b235f634/attachment.html>