[License-review] Submission of the Upstream Compatibility License v1.0 (UCL-1.0) for approval

[Richard Fontana]

Nigel, I believe this is your last draft:
https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-February/002980.html
Note: the title is not consistent ("Compatible" vs. "Compatibility") and
you have "Derivative Work" where perhaps you want "Derivative Works".
 

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017, at 09:41 AM, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
> Richard,
> 
> Yes, that would be good.  I’ll put the new text into a formal application
> for you.
> 
> Nigel
> 
> On 3/29/17, 5:56 PM, "License-review on behalf of Richard Fontana"
> <license-review-bounces at opensource.org on behalf of
> fontana at opensource.org> wrote:
> 
>     Nigel,
>     
>     Looks like I did not respond to this question. The next OSI board
>     meeting is next week. Do you want to submit the revised UCL for
>     approval? If so I will recommend approval and I am fairly confident
>     that
>     a decision of some sort can be reached at the meeting. 
>     
>     Richard
>     
>     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017, at 09:41 PM, Nigel T wrote:
>     > Richard,
>     > 
>     > When is the next board meeting? Thanks!
>     > 
>     > Nigel
>     > 
>     > > On Feb 23, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Richard Fontana <fontana at sharpeleven.org> wrote:
>     > > 
>     > >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:40:44PM -0500, Nigel T wrote:
>     > >> 
>     > >> The complete text of the updated license is below.  Let me know if this
>     > >> does not address the comments provided in the earlier discussion.  If it
>     > >> does then I will repackage the submission and have it ready for the board
>     > >> to vote on.
>     > > 
>     > > It certainly reduces the earlier basis for objection on the grounds of
>     > > "asymmetry" though doesn't eliminate it entirely. Also as I think you
>     > > have pointed out (and something I am still struggling with) maybe we
>     > > should be applying a more lenient standard to "special purpose"
>     > > licenses. But I am curious to hear other reactions.
>     > > 
>     > > Richard
>     > > 
>     > > _______________________________________________
>     > > 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
>     _______________________________________________
>     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