[License-review] Submission of OSET Public License for Approval
josh at postgresql.org
Fri Sep 11 15:28:45 UTC 2015
On 09/11/2015 09:11 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> When you add "national security or necessity of public interest" into
> that mix, you are adding factors which are much woollier, and
> furthermore _are_ under the control of the licensee (in the case where
> it's a government using the software for their own elections) and do not
> have to be written down. Who defines "the public interest" or "national
> security"? The government does. Does it have to document its decisions
> and open them for scrutiny? No. Which means they get to ignore any bits
> of the license they don't like as long as they can come up with a
> "public interest" reason why obeying the license isn't a good idea.
> Therefore, I would say that this change is a significant one.
I can't say I'm too keen about the language in the MPL either, but
that's water under the bridge.
Heather, care to address Gerv's points?
More information about the License-review