For Approval: Transitive Grace Period Public Licence, v1.0
nelson at crynwr.com
Sun Feb 1 02:51:43 UTC 2009
> I still do need OSI approval for the Transitive Grace Period Public
> Licence. The intent of the TGPPL cannot be expressed clearly without
> adding requirements, namely the requirement to open-source derived
> works under the TGPPL.
You are merely giving licensees the freedom to not comply with a
certain term of the OSL for 12 months as long as they give any
sublicensees the same freedom.
You can and should get a lawyer to put a spit shine on this statement,
but you aren't adding requirements. You're putting a requirement on
your wavier. Anybody who doesn't like it is free to decline your
wavier, at which point they have to comply with the OSD. You are free
to offer the waiver to their sublicensees.
You can't force people to accept freedom. If you could, the irony
would kill you.
I've reviewed this license's review, and I can't find anybody who
agreed with Mr. Wilcox-O'Hearn that his license is required in order
to achieve his goal. Has anybody changed their mind?
If I get no positive responses within 48 hours, I'll submit a license
committee report that says roughly "Hey, great idea, Zooko, implement
it as a conditional waiver to the OSD 3.0".
--my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | Delegislation is a slippery
Cloudmade supports http://openstreetmap.org/ | slope to prosperity.
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | Fewer laws, more freedom.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog | (Not a GOP supporter).
More information about the License-review