[License-review] Request for approval of the Non-Coercive Copyleft Licence (NCCL) 1.0

[Tim Makarios]

On Mon, 2015-07-20 at 13:49 -0400, Kevin Fleming wrote:
> Is it practical for a license to be considered for 'open source' usage
> if the license text implies that there is a single copyright
> holder/licensor (there are multiple references to 'I' in this
> license)? How would this be expected to work if someone produces a
> Derived Work and distributes it? Who is 'I' in that situation?

The use of "I" comes straight from SimPL 2.0, which is OSI-approved, and
is meant to be equivalent to GPL 2.0.  But I'm not especially attached
to this wording, so I'd be willing to change it if it is going to be a
problem.  What do others think about this?

Would "we" in the case of a single author be less strange or legally
problematic?

Tim
<><