EUPL status

Schmitz, Patrice-Emmanuel patrice-emmanuel.schmitz at
Mon Jan 26 10:57:07 UTC 2009

Hi Matthew & all,

The EUPL v.1.1 license was indeed approved by the European Commission on
9 January 2009 and published on the EC official site
( and on last week.

Originally, the text of the EUPL v.1.0 was submitted to OSI on 14 March

Following this submission and 2 months discussion with OSI reviewers, a
revised "draft EUPL v.1.1" was submitted to OSI on 13 May 2008. This
draft was based on the discussion with OSI:

It received ticket #162

The text of the EUPL v.1.1 that was just approved corresponds to the
text of the draft that was re-submitted to OSI in May 2008. Therefore
(in my opinion) no new submission is needed.

The duration of this procedure is due to the necessary decision process
at the European Commission: after taking advice from experts and being
screened and approved by the Legal Service, the new version had to be
translated in 22 official linguistic versions and to be finally approved
by the College.   

Patrice-E. Schmitz team

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Flaschen [mailto:matthew.flaschen at] 
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:51 AM
To: License Review
Subject: Re: EUPL status

Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst at> [2009-01-21 14:19]:
>> It may be my lack of Google-fu, but it is unclear to me what the
>> status of the EUPL in the approval process is, other than that it
>> has not been approved (yet). Can anyone enlighten me on this
>> subject?
> According to OSOR, version 1.1 of the EUPL has just been approved by
> the European Commission.  So we just need someone to formally submit
> the license for review.
> See

EUPL 1.0 was submitted to OSI, then due to our feedback, a modified 1.1
was written and 1.0 was effectively withdrawn on May 13, 2008 concurrent
with the submission of EUPL 1.1

However, there wasn't much feedback and the licensing committee last
judged (, "The license
was re-submitted just yesterday; not enough time has passed to get
comments on the changes."

Matt Flaschen

More information about the License-review mailing list