<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/20/2022 3:15 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87sfklluwc.fsf@ebb.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">So, to stay “Linagora's LinShare license doesn't comply with
OSD” is misleading. It <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>does<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> comply with OSD (and AGPLv3) because Lingora
actually gives permission to remove all the problematic restrictions that
concern all of us and would (theoretically, but for AGPLv3§7¶4) cause
OSD-non-compliance. </pre>
</blockquote>
So you are saying that it would be appropriate for the OSI to
approve the license, they would just have their fingers crossed
behind their back that it was with the knowledge that a provision is
unenforceable? That's just silly, the OSI does not approve licenses
that are facially non-compliant.<br>
<br>
I think you're right that no one has a claim against the party
adding the restriction, for example, in the situation where a party
is using AGPL software and their terms of use prohibit
redistribution, because the AGPL is not worded that way. It doesn't
prohibit adding restrictions (so it's not a breach of contract to
add them), the only relief is to remove them. Which you will do with
<i>Neo4j</i>, which rejected exactly your theory about removing the
restriction, lurking in the background.<br>
<br>
And the OSI view on <i>Neo4j </i>is quite different from how you
characterized it. There were two aspects of the decision, a false
advertising one and a license interpretation one. OSI applauded the
court's conclusion that the AGPL combined with the Commons Clause
could not be called an open source license, which is a victory for
open source. But the OSI also took a strong position against the
court's interpretation of how the addition of the Commons Clause
should have been treated in a blog post titled "<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://blog.opensource.org/modified-agplv3-removes-freedoms-adds-legal-headaches/">User
beware: Modified AGPLv3 removes freedoms, adds legal headaches</a>,"
a blog post that quoted and linked to the Conservancy position.
Please be more accurate in your reporting.<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
PO Box 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
919-800-8033<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chesteklegal.com">www.chesteklegal.com</a></div>
</body>
</html>