[License-discuss] How can we as a community help empower authors outside license agreements?

[Tobie Langel]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 21:16 Nigel T <nigel.2048 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 12:44 PM Tobie Langel <tobie at unlockopen.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I believe that to many open source practitioners, the meaning of open
>> source is much broader than the OSD. For example, Ethan Marcotte coined the
>> term "nominally open source," to talk about a project that had an open
>> source license, but a closed governance model[1], and many rallied behind
>> this definition.
>>
>> Clearly implied there is a broader set of values that are necessary to
>> meet the spirit of open source than just following the OSD to the letter.
>>
>
> Nope.  What matters is access to the source, not the governance of the
> project whether cathedral or bazaar.  BOTH are and always have been open
> source.
>
> If I develop my own little tool on my own and gift the source to the world
> under an OSI approved license that's all that matters and I DO meet the
> spirit of Open Source because that definition is inclusive and not
> exclusive as you seem to prefer.
>

I’m not arguing this point of view. I’m reporting on a point of view
commonly held within the community. I have said nothing as to whether I
share this point of view or not (I actually hold a much more nuanced
position), and I’d greatly appreciate if you didn’t respond to what you
believe that “[I] seem to prefer,” but instead to what I actually wrote. It
would really help keep the conversation friendly and productive. Thank you!

—tobie
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200321/cca86ef5/attachment.html>