[License-review] For Approval: License Zero Reciprocal Public License

[Kyle Mitchell]

On 2017-10-24 23:10, Simon Phipps wrote:
> All your questions seem to omit the context that the open source license
> exists not as an independent intellectual exercise for copyright attorneys
> but as a pragmatic matter of advocacy and implementation for software
> freedom.

And now we've reached the core meta-question again!

All the same, I'd greatly appreciate a return to my numbered
questions, at some point.  I think both questions are
valuable ones.

> OSI does not approve licenses in isolation as an academic exercise but as a
> matter of protecting and promoting open source software, development and
> communities; championing software freedom in society through education,
> collaboration, and infrastructure; and preventing abuse of the ideals and
> ethos inherent to the open source movement. (taken from
> https://opensource.org/)
>
> A license could conceivably avoid disqualification under the OSD and yet
> not be approved by the Board because it undermines OSI's larger role of
> crystallising and stewarding the consensus of the larger community[1]. It's
> unlikely extensive rules will be made to codify that reality.[2]

OSI license approval is presented, publicly, as approval of
license terms under OSD.  I've heard now from several
voices, though not all, that the picture thus painted is
incomplete.  If the license approval process applies
uncodified policy objectives in addition to OSD, my
recommendation remains to acknowledge that transparently, at
least on the public process webpage, and to solicit help
codifying the policy objectives, as needed.  Whether to
engage in the approval process for L0-R is my call. I fully
admit that how that process works, and how it's portrayed
publicly, are not.  But I care, all the same.

Back to L0-R, of course I am happy to address policy
concerns, in addition to OSD issues.  I think I have, though
it takes more work in communication, and can feel a bit
rudderless without common, written ground to start from.
I've also taken pains to ask others to help me tell when
we're talking policy, and when we're talking OSD.  It's come
up a lot.

I hope I've been transparent.  I'd like acknowledgment of
OSD conformance, and I'd like OSI approval.  Distinguishing
whether concerns are OSD- or policy-based goes to the
former.  As for the latter, I must admit I'm feeling at a
bit of a loss for direction.  I remain open to revisions to
get there.

-- 
Kyle Mitchell, attorney // Oakland // (510) 712 - 0933