[License-review] License submission for approval for Moritz30-Projects Open Source License Version 1

[Josh berkus]

On 06/07/2016 12:28 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
> On 06/07/2016 12:18 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
>> On 06/07/2016 12:07 PM, Tom Callaway wrote:
>>> Perhaps incoming licenses that wish to be reviewed could also answer the
>>> question of whether the license text has been reviewed by a lawyer?
>>> While not strictly required (I know of a few people who have never
>>> passed the bar but could probably write a OSI compliant license), it
>>> would certainly shine light on both the submitter and the license. 
>>
>> It's a reasonable question to ask of a submitter of a license in the
>> course of discussion of the license. I am reluctant to make it a
>> required or expected piece of information for a license submission
>> though (as it comes close to a requirement that a lawyer have been
>> consulted, which is something that has been suggested in the past but
>> which I consider a bad idea).
> 
> I'd say "lawyer or expert".  The quesiton on our standard form could be
> broader:
> 
> Q: What expertise did you make use of when drafting this license?  Did
> you receive advice from an attorney or other licensing expert?

In the best of all possible worlds, OSI would provide license-drafting
advice.  However, license-review is NOT the place to get such advice; it
would need to be delivered one-on-one by OSI volunteers.

The obstacles to this are we don't have such volunteers, and are
unlikely to find them.  Some of us have conflicts of interest (like some
of the attorneys get paid for this sort of thing), and some of us (like
me) prefer to reject 98% of proposed licenses.

Also, given advice on license drafting would need to be handled very
carefully in order to make sure that providing drafting advice wasn't
seen as pre-approval of the resulting document.

--Josh