Open Source Content License (OSCL)

Bruce Perens bruce at
Mon Mar 31 17:38:28 UTC 2008

OSCL Steward wrote:
 > any derivative works must be released under this version or a newer 
version of the Open Source Content License and published by RCB I.T. 

This looks to be clearly against OSD #5, regarding discrimination 
against persons or groups.

So, is your intent here that derivative works are not licensed unless 
your own company publishes them?

 > If anyone here has any legal background and would give a free 
assessment of the license that would be awesome because do the issue of 
hiring an attorney to look at it is too expensive for my small company.

I know you mean well, but the license text either doesn't communicate 
the intent clearly or the intent is not compliant with the OSD.
I would think that legal review is a reasonable prerequisite before you 
submit a license here these days*. The various free legal resources like 
SFLC don't generally perform work for for-profit entities. If you can't 
afford counsel, your best choice would be to select one of the existing 
Open Source or Creative Commons licenses. It looks as if your intent 
might best fit one of the non-commercial ones.

And also, OSI has historicaly been loath to certify licenses for 
anything but software.

I suggest that you withdraw your application for certification until you 
can produce something with legal review and a more clear intent.

    Respectfully Submitted

    Bruce Perens

* And I acknowledge that legal review was not available to me 10 years 
ago when the OSD was created.
Not speaking for OSI. I created the OSD (for the Debian project), about 
8 months before OSI formed.

More information about the License-review mailing list