[License-review] Hooyami License Version 1.0 for Approval

Smith, McCoy mccoy.smith at intel.com
Thu Jul 27 16:08:00 UTC 2017

This sentence: “Unless permission is granted by Author of that source code and binary form to you ("person"), only modification to the source code and binary form may be relicense with a different license.” is also quite confusing.  It seems to be saying the opposite of what you claim you want the license to accomplish.

From: License-review [mailto:license-review-bounces at opensource.org] On Behalf Of Carlo Piana
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 6:46 AM
To: license-review at opensource.org
Subject: Re: [License-review] Hooyami License Version 1.0 for Approval


I don't mean to be rude, but the rationale for this license seems quite far fetched. Have you consulted an open source legal professional, before submitting, or are yourself one? Your statement that, using similar (hundreds of them) licenses, people are not able to do what open source is supposed to do is puzzling at best, but it is entirely possible that I have misunderstood you.

I also note that you have inserted an explicit patent license with capitalized terms like "Contributor" or "You", but those terms are not defined elsewhere. It looks like it has been cut and pasted from another license (Apache).

I don't see this license being obviously contrary to the OSD, but at a cursory reading it fails some minimal quality acceptance criteria. Moreover, it presents no non-proliferation rationale.

As such, my humble opinion is that for the time being it shall be disapproved.

With best regards,

Carlo Piana

On 27/07/2017 12:14, nicklaus yap wrote:
Hello. My name is nicklaus yap ken yik. The reason I am sending this message is to get my license approve under open source. Any feedback on improvement of this license is also appreciated.

Hooyami License Version 1.0 is the same as other open source license which give people the right to use, copy, share, distribute, modify their source code and binary form. The only thing this license address is to make it clear about relicensing the source code and binary form compare to other open source license. Many other open source license do not state clearly about this which let people to abuse it by copying the source code and binary form and putting it in other open source project and changing the license when there are not the original contributor or author. The effect is most open source project cannot use that source code and binary form for their own purpose which is the main reason of open source.


License-review mailing list

License-review at opensource.org<mailto:License-review at opensource.org>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20170727/ee970ae7/attachment.html>

More information about the License-review mailing list