[License-discuss] Blue OakModel License and the license reinvention dilemma

[Bruce Perens]

I would like to discuss the genesis of the Blue Oak Model License - which
we have just been considering - and its problems. The Blue Oak Council was
an ambitious effort by three lawyers who have all done more successful work
in the Open Source space. They went to the trouble of forming a 501(c)3 for
it. They produced the Model License and a list of OSI-approved licenses
graded by legal quality, information that I wish OSI had adopted for their
own site. OSI has approved some licenses which Blue Oak graded as "Lead"
rather than Bronze or Gold, which is IMO really important information to
developers who could use those licenses when better alternatives exist, and
thus avoid a bad time in court. The Blue Oak list remained
little-publicized.

A long time ago Larry Rosen drafted several versions of Open Source
licenses that he meant to improve upon our existing choices. It was a lot
of work. And very few people were interested, leaving Larry somewhat bitter
about the whole experience, which was amply communicated on OSI mailing
lists.

This, IMO, reoccurred with the Blue Oak Model License, intended to replace
the gift-style licenses currently approved by OSI, BSD/MIT in particular.
It seems that very few people cared enough to adopt it, and we did not see
further visible activity by the Blue Oak Council, although their web site
still solicits for donations today and maybe they answer emails usefully.

So, what we ended up with was a legally good (except for the moral rights
issue) license, by one lawyer I know to be excellent and two whom I have
seen less of but are at least competent and perhaps much better. But its
main effect was to increase the number of OSI-approved licenses and the
combinatorial problem, rather than increase the quality of licenses that
actually had significant use. This, I think, is also true for Larry's
licenses.

This is something that I think OSI should keep in mind regarding the
license approval process. Even the submitters we could grade as most
competent have licenses fall flat, and fail to achieve the community
benefit they desire.

And it's something I am keeping in my own thoughts.

    Thanks

    Bruce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20240315/5270d68d/attachment.html>