[License-review] Octopus License

Richard Fontana fontana at opensource.org
Sun Jan 8 19:26:55 UTC 2017

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:13:14PM +0300, dialog purpose wrote:
> Hi, I have send my license for approving, but no one is not even mention or
> reply to me.

Actually you did get some responses prior to the New Year.

Can you please review https://opensource.org/approval and provide all
the 'supporting data' requested?

A few of the people responding have asked essentially what value you
think this license provides beyond the widely-used MIT and 3/2-clause
BSD licenses. I don't think you have adequately answered this question

> My license allows modification to the software be copyrighted
> by their authors and need not to follow the licesing terms described in the
> license,

This is also understood to be a feature of all commonly-used
noncopyleft open source licenses.

> also, it has the "and license" in permission list, which makes it
> clear tha relicesing and sublicensing is granted,

The MIT license explicitly permits sublicensing.

> these are major
> differences between Octopus License and other licenses (including copyfree
> and copyleft and weak copyleft licenses), in fact, Octopus License has many
> more technical differences to other licenses, but it fully follows the Open
> Source Definition and conditions. Please, OSI, approve my license as soon
> as possible, it has been a month that I cannot release my collaborative
> open source project, because I want to use the Atlassian products which are
> free for public open source projects but with the condition of being
> licensed under an OSI-approved license.

I am afraid we can't rush approval. If you're in a hurry to use a
Atlassian product free of charge, what's the harm in using, say, the
MIT license for the current version of your project, given that it is
very similar to the license you've drafted?


More information about the License-review mailing list