For Approval: Transitive Grace Period Public Licence, v1.0

Chris Zumbrunn chris at
Thu Feb 19 19:35:29 UTC 2009

On Feb 19, 2009, at 19:11 , Bruce Perens wrote:

> Chris Zumbrunn wrote:
>> No, because for the first twelve month the license behaves like a  
>> permissive open source license.
> Actually, it doesn't. A permissive or "gift" Open Source license  
> allows software under /other/ licenses, generally a proprietary  
> license or "All Rights Reserved", to be combined with the Open  
> Source component.
> In the case of software under the TGPPL, the restricted component is  
> under the TGPPL, rather than another license. But that component is  
> not Open Source until some time expires.
> Consider the situation of someone who acquires that software and  
> redistributes it as if it were Open Source. That person would be  
> subject to criminal prosecution under trade secrets law and civil  
> suit for copyright infringement. Even though the TGPPL applied to  
> the software in question.
> Thus, it is difficult for me to see how the TGPPL could be OSD  
> compliant.

I'm not defending the TGPPL, I'm just picking at it from a different  

The license explicitly allows me to distribute my derivative work  
without licensing it under the TGPPL (as long as I can magically  
ensure that after a period of 12 month the TGPPL will apply). That  
part is worded clearly. What isn't clear at all is under which other  
license I would be able to license my derivative work for that 12  
months period. Apparently anything would go, as long as these other  
license terms terminate within the timeframe.

Of course, a license that only behaves like a permissive open source  
license for a period of 12 month would be an oxymoron.


More information about the License-review mailing list