[License-review] License compatibility for FOSS aggregations

[John Cowan]

Lawrence Rosen scripsit:

> Are you suggesting that there's a good reason for FOSS projects to prevent
> me, because of some Latin phrase obscure to all but those of the Catholic
> faith, from reusing their free content?

Say what?  _Communis opinio_ is one of the canons of statutory interpretation.
It goes back to Coke's Institutes, and has been mentioned in recent Supreme
Court cases.  Admittedly Scalia doesn't like it, but Stevens did.

> Point me to the clause in the OSD or their license that authorizes that.

OSD #3 says that it must be possible to distribute derivative works under
the same license as the original.  It does not say that it must be possible
to distribute them under any license whatsoever.

> I'm Jewish, 

Nu, go ask a posek what weight the common opinion of the sages has.

> Unless you are speaking about my infringing their work in some way, in which
> case I will bow to the courts on that.

Well, that's the issue.  All prohibitions in FOSS licenses are backed up
by the threat of infringement lawsuits.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
Knowledge studies others / Wisdom is self-known;
Muscle masters brothers / Self-mastery is bone;
Content need never borrow / Ambition wanders blind;
Vitality cleaves to the marrow / Leaving death behind.    --Tao 33 (Bynner)