[Fwd: Re: What would work instead of the MXM public license?]

Carlo Piana osi-review at piana.eu
Wed Apr 15 14:39:21 UTC 2009

Russ Nelson ha scritto:
> Bruce Perens writes:
>  > My view of the OSD, independently from the reading and the intentions of
>  > the creator, is that the key point lies with the interpretation of rule #1.
>  > 
>  > a) If the conditions extend to all patents (but all patents of whom?),
> The licensor.  We have no control over third-party patents, so we have
> to ignore them.


>  > Actually, patent ridden software containing a lot of
>  > code originally released under the BSD license is on the shelves,
> Innocent until proven guilty.
>  > The point is that it is not just the license that makes the software
>  > "open source" (or Free Software), but a plethora of rights and technical
>  > constraints, as the TiVo issue has exposed quite clearly. The license is
>  > a pre-condition, but it is not sufficient.
> And the goal is not to merely have freely copyable software, but
> instead to have a strong community backing the software, with a
> pyramid consisting of a base of strong, supportive users who document
> their use, document the code, submit bugs, donate money, etc, a
> mid-stage of casual committers, and a peak of committed donors of
> code.
> So, no, a license is just a pre-condition.

I was referring to the legal aspects. This list is good, but is entirely
on the development side. If we speak about Freedom, this is entirely
irrelevant (not in the general picture, just in our specific area of

>  > As per your suggestion to switch to a strong copyleft license, such as
>  > the AGPL v.3, this was my initial suggestion ans I still sort of
>  > advocate it. The point is that a strong copyleft license has many
>  > downsides in the standardization process, because the reference code
>  > cannot be put into a proprietary derivative as mandated by the
>  > neutrality of the standard making process.
> No, but the copyright holder on the reference code can dual-license it.
This does not help very much if the copyright holder is not the patent
holder and vice versa. I think I have already tackled the issue of dual

With best regards,


More information about the License-review mailing list