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

Thu Jun 9 05:29:39 UTC 2016

I made an other update:

"Moritz30-Projects Open Source License Version 1"
was changed to
"Moritz30-Projects Open Source License Version 1.1"
(added sub version number)

"Definitions:
- "original" means of the unmodified and complete version"
was removed
(removal of "original")

"By using ____________________________________ (later the software) or it’s source code (later the source code) you accept the following license agreement between you and ________________________ (later the publisher, the software creator, I, me):"
was kept

"1.	Redistribution of unmodified and complete versions are allowed as long as you link the original software’s homepage and it’s source code on the download page provided by you. You also have to credit the original software creator."
was changed to
"1.	Redistribution of the versions published here is allowed as long as you add an appropriate copyright notice on your download page and inform about the license."
(no more linking required)

"2.	Redistribution of modified versions is allowed as long as the binary files (if available) AND the source code are published under this license.
3.	These permissions are not exclusive and can’t get revoked until you break this agreement.
4.	If you break this agreement it will become invalid and you aren’t allowed to use and/or redistribute the software and/or it’s source code and modified versions of this software and/or it’s source code anymore.
5.	If this software is a library, you ARE allowed to use it in your commercial and/or non-commercial software. You don't have to but are allowed to use this license for the software you use the library for.
6.	You can use this license for every open source software you have permission to license but you are not allowed to modify the license without permission from Matthias Merkel.
7.	This license doesn’t override the copyright. It just grants special rights and defines special requirements.
8.	If one paragraph of this license is invalid due to legal reasons the other paragraphs of this license are not affected.
9.	The license creator can modify this license at any time. Modifications will not become valid for this software until the new license is added to it.
10.	You are allowed to take snippets of code from this software without the need to credit the software creator. If more than 50% of the code of your software are from this software you have to use this license, otherwise you are allowed to but don't have to.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

Contact:

Software Creator:
Name: ______________________________________________
Website (if available): ______________________________________________
E-Mail: _________________ at ____________________.___

License creator:
Name: Matthias Merkel
Website: https://moritz30.de
E-Mail: moritz30 at moritz30.de"
was kept

Some more notices:
1. As you see, I made the license very free. The only thing I want is that modifications are open source, too.

New link: https://license-drafts.m30.ovh/os-1.1.txt
Alternative1: https://licenses.moritz30.de/drafts/os-1.1.txt
Alternative2: http://paste.moritz30.de/view/raw/efe86011

---- On Do, 09 Jun 2016 06:13:07 +0200 moritz30 at moritz30.de wrote ----

"Also, Matthias really should not have started out titling it 'Open Source
Licence' without OSI review, as that is the very thing that was to be
determined, and, frankly, sounds extremely unlikely."
-
This is only a license draft for review. It is not an actually used license. Otherwise I wouldn't call it open source license.

"Also, Matthias, shouldn't your licence text include at least a timestamp
for the most recent revision time -- if not a specific licence version
number?"
-
I think I'll create sub version numbers.

To the link to the original softwate you're right. I'll change it in just an appropriate copyright notice. I'll also remove the part with "original" because as you said it's confusing in open source software licenses.

---- On Mi, 08 Jun 2016 23:58:51 +0200 rick at linuxmafia.com wrote ----

Quoting Simon Phipps (simon at webmink.com):

> Sending only the link like this will not make things easy for anyone.
> Please ensure the formatted and full text of your proposed license is
> in any e-mail where you announce revisions -- preferably with
> annotation to show where is has changed from the previous version and
> the reason for the change.

Also, Matthias, shouldn't your licence text include at least a timestamp
for the most recent revision time -- if not a specific licence version
number?

Mattias's currently available text on pastebin claims to be
'Moritz30-Projects Open Source License Version 1', but so did the
earlier, pre-revision text. Lack of revision indicator makes discussion
difficult.

Also, Matthias really should not have started out titling it 'Open Source
Licence' without OSI review, as that is the very thing that was to be
determined, and, frankly, sounds extremely unlikely.

At a quick glance at _today's_ text at
http://paste.moritz30.de/view/raw/72d5911b, quite a number of the
clauses seem deeply problematic. Going into the details doesn't even
strike me as a good use of Mattias's time or anyone else's. IMO, it
would be far better if he would simply use an existing, standard open
source licence (or a proprietary one if that better meets his needs).

_______________________________________________
License-review mailing list
License-review at opensource.org
https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
_______________________________________________
License-review mailing list
License-review at opensource.org
https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20160609/5635b477/attachment.html>