[License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu Initiative

[Bruce Perens]

Well that joke backfired on me, didn't it? I made a charicture of "ethical"
licenses, and ended up withdrawing it because I was afraid they'd actually
approve it! It was meant to be like a "moot bill". A lot of people did not
then, and still do not get the concept. Silly me for expecting them to. I
can't truly say I regret pranking them, though.

Regarding anonymity, there is little proof of the identity of many people
on this list. Debian always required that someone meet you and cross-sign
your key before you could check in a package. You can always take charge of
that if you want an effective filter.

Thanks

Bruce

On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 18:00 McCoy Smith <mccoy at lexpan.law> wrote:

> I agree.
>
> Unfortunately, these sort of “whimsical,” unserious,
> impossible-to-satisfy-the-OSI-definition submissions are a fairly regular
> phenomenon these days on the OSI e-mail lists. I think the submitters who
> do this were emboldened by whoever it was that submitted the Vaccine
> License <https://blog.opensource.org/licensereview102019/> back in 2019.
> Shame on that person for starting the trend.
>
> I think OSI was going to use the Vaccine License submission and subsequent
> history as an example of what people should not be doing (and probably
> should also have a policy that potentially frowns upon anonymized
> submissions) and put something about that in the pages on license
> discussion/review. Might want to revisit that.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, February 5, 2024 8:03 AM
> *To:* mccoy at lexpan.law
> *Cc:* license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> *Subject:* Re: [License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu Initiative
>
>
>
> It is a crayon license, and the author points out its whimsical nature
> while wishfully saying the terms bind anyway. There is no point in passing
> it on for disapproval or doing anything else to take it seriously. Just
> politely tell the author there isn't a chance.
>
>
>
> IMO if you want to help the open source community, don't draft a new
> license. I actually do not see value in even continuing the approval
> process at this late date. It's just not the case that any new submission
> contributes useful art.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 15:52 McCoy Smith <mccoy at lexpan.law> wrote:
>
> And asked for review. Which he got.
>
> Do you disagree that this license can’t get OSI approval?
>
>
>
> *From:* Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, February 5, 2024 7:47 AM
> *To:* mccoy at lexpan.law; license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> *Subject:* Re: [License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu Initiative
>
>
>
> Note that he sent his review request to license-discuss.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 15:45 McCoy Smith <mccoy at lexpan.law> wrote:
>
> Daniel:
>
> In order to have a license reviewed, you need to provide the assurances
> and information about the license (
> https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process/) including that it
> doesn’t violate any of the OSD. You have not done any of that.
>
> Since Section 4 of this license does violate OSD 6, it’s not approvable.
> So I’d suggest that this license be forwarded to the Board for denial.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* License-discuss <license-discuss-bounces at lists.opensource.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Daniel Mihai
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 3, 2024 10:10 AM
> *To:* license-discuss at lists.opensource.org
> *Subject:* [License-discuss] License Review Request - Anu Initiative
>
>
>
> Hi friends,
>
>
>
> I hope this message finds you well and embracing the natural world with
> enthusiasm and care.
>
>
>
> I'm reaching out from the Anu Initiative, a nonprofit organization rooted
> in Dublin, Ireland, with a mission deeply intertwined with the love and
> restoration of our planet. We are a collective of nature enthusiasts
> leveraging innovative technologies to mend the environmental scars left by
> human activities and certain technological impacts.
>
>
>
> At Anu Initiative, we are not just another entity in the environmental
> sphere. We diverge from the conventional path of carbon credits, focusing
> instead on tangible ecological contributions. Our open-source platform
> epitomizes transparency, allowing anyone to witness the journey of every
> contribution made towards a greener tomorrow.
>
>
>
> As we continue to weave technology with nature's restoration, we are
> reviewing our Open License Agreement to ensure it aligns with our core
> values of Transparency, Passion, Integrity, Commitment, and Community. Your
> expertise and insights would be invaluable in this process.
>
>
>
> Could you please review our agreement?
> https://forum.anuinitiative.org/t/anu-initiative-open-license-agreement-ai-ola/80
>
>
>
> Thank you for considering our request. Together, we can turn the tide
> towards a sustainable future.
>
>
>
> Warm regards,
>
>
>
> *Daniel Mihai*
>
> Founder and CTO
>
>
>
> *Mobile:* +353 (0) 87 450 8112
> *E-mail:* daniel at anuinitiative.org
>
> *Web-site:* https://anuinitiative.org
>
>
> *Let’s take the initiative!*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not
> necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the
> Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
>
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20240205/8cc1e950/attachment-0001.html>