[License-discuss] Question about Blue Oak License

[Shuji Sado]

Hi,

I am concerned that BlueOak only specifies "infringe that
contributor's copyright".
Since copyright and moral rights are two different rights, I believe
that in the case of BlueOak's clause, the right to exercise moral
rights is reserved to the original right holder. This is only an
interpretation under Japanese law.

Perhaps, if the clause is "Permission to reproduce, modify, and
distribute", it could be interpreted that the right holder does not
suspend the permission by exercising his/her moral rights.

---
Shuji Sado
Chairman, Open Source Group Japan
https://opensource.jp/


2024/03/14 9:59 Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com>:
>
> I'm curious why this particular license caught your attention. As far as
> I know, only the EUPL has an accommodation for moral rights. Wouldn't
> the same criticism hold true for all the other licenses too?
>
> Pam
>
> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chestek Legal
> 300 Fayetteville Street
> Unit 2492
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> +1 919-800-8033
> pamela at chesteklegal.com
> www.chesteklegal.com
>
> On 3/13/2024 9:46 AM, Shuji Sado wrote:
> > Hi everyone.
> >
> > # For some reason my email to OSI arrives two days late, so my reply
> > may be delayed.
> >
> > I have a question about the Blue Oak Model License.  see
> > https://opensource.org/license/blue-oak-model-license
> >
> > This license seems to be an easy-to-read and understandable license
> > for corporate legal professionals.
> > However, I have recently started to think that the following copyright
> > clause may not work in Japan, where I live.
> >
> >   "Each contributor licenses you to do everything with this software
> > that would otherwise infringe that contributor's copyright in it."
> >
> > In Japan, copyright, which is a property right, and moral rights are
> > separated. Copyright allows you to grant rights to others and to
> > transfer those rights.
> > Moral rights, however, cannot be transferred. The BlueOak license
> > clearly states "copyright," but this would probably be interpreted in
> > Japan as not including moral rights.
> > In other words, it seems to me that an author who releases software
> > under this license can stop users from distributing or modifying the
> > software at any time.
> >
> > To prevent this, I think it is necessary to mention the moral rights
> > in the article or to insert a statement that the software is licensed
> > for copying, distribution, and modification.
> >
> > I am writing from a Japanese context, but perhaps there are similar
> > problems in other jurisdictions that recognize moral rights. I would
> > like to hear opinions here.
> >
> > ---
> > Shuji Sado
> > Chairman, Open Source Group Japan
> > https://opensource.jp/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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